Skeleg raises an interesting point. He says,

"I think because once you get this close to building a mine and going into production, you become valued much better."

That´s an encouraging idea, BUT I have trouble seeing Guyana Goldfields as an example. If anything, their SP is now lower than a year ago.

In contrast to Tyhee, they claim 5.7m oz M&I Au, at a Tyhee-like grade of 3.8gpt, but at a cash cost of $400/oz Au with a mine life of 17 years producing 3,000 Au ounces per year.

Does this justify their Mktcap of $750m? If you look at their SP over the last 4 years, unlike Tyhee, they´ve had a consistently high Mktcap.

Who was it who said the market is always right?

Anyway, Skel´s idea of a higher valuation following a positive FS (my words) with production closer to the horizon is an exciting one. One that I believe Greg Taylor and many of us embrace. But is it inevitable, or even historically correct?

If so, someone, anyone,please show me an example.