That's a fairly sound argument as far as I can tell.
Even more sound to me considering I have often compared this to the next Osisko, and in fact I think that comparison is still valid. This project actually WAS Osisko before they focused on Malactic and now they are actually back.
Without assays, my arguments in support of that are fruitless.
The 100MT idea also helped drive the price up in 2010.
There is absolutely a great deal of speculation included in the price.
GNH has done more exploratory drilling than almost every jr explorer in 2010, from what I can tell.
They have put several pieces of the puzzle together to add a second drill and get to the next level of financing.
Therein lies some value you have not included in your theory. New directors, expanded field office, geochem surveys, understanding of geology, 43-101 report, new US listing, lots of quartz diorite discovered at surface and in the ground, expanded geological team, approx 20 instances of VG, a 6km step-out hole, and a world of awareness.
However, similar to my Osisko argument....these milestones are technically worthless without positive assays.
On the flipside, IF the assays are good then all of these milestones have much added value.
So...I think we are worth more than 18 cents we were at post Hoovs endorsement but the added value is not as tangible as if we had assays to 'back-up' the efforts and $$ spent this year by management.
