Imo, I'm betting that is the case and explains what happened when we called off our drilling program. What other explaination fits? If Teck doesn't give us a reasonable valuation on those 171M tons of inferred in the BFS model ( plus the rest of the inferred ) then Elmer has been negligent in his duty to maximize shareholder value. Anyways, in two months time we will most likely know.
CUU is an exploration company. Drilling is its main purpose. The drills were definitely called off for a reason. And the BFS was very, very conservative because it was specifically designed for our end of the Teck contract showing a positive BFS with the worst of worst case scenarios. Take a look at WRN's BFS, at first glance it does not look like a "conservative" BFS. We had Teck looking over Elmer's shoulder for the past 2 years. And now CUU shows a profit with a minimal amount of production/resources BUT maximum amount of risk and costs.
I will try hard to make the Vancouver Conference this month. However, if I am unable... then i'd like somebody to ask Elmer: Why were the drills called off? The answer to this question may come more from tone of voice and facial expressions than words.
There is more to this story than we currently know now.
