First of all you stated:
"historically this is an extremely low valuation for any metals resource. I would say 10% (5-10%) would be an average paid for in-situ resources over the past decades."
You are comparing apples to mostly oranges when you compare Freewest to typical metal asset trades of the past.
Non National Instrument defined assets are down in the two percent or lower depending on the quality of the drilling achieved, i.e. confidence status of data reported.
Once the data is presented according to 43-101 then it becomes about 5% of in-ground for the proven part and a bit lower for the probable and inferred portions while without a 43-101 any in-ground assets is more like indicated and hypothetical. That is why the loosly defined assets are valued in the fraction of one percent.
Noront has some of it's assets defined with a 43-101 so it is not in the same category as Frewest's assets. That is why the market was giving such low value to Freewest shares. The premium that you see during a buyout of a company is not a true indication of present value but of future (speculative) value combined with present. Be mindfull that a premium is paid for the very incentive for one to part with one's shares, like when a property is expropriated.
For ten percent of in-ground you need basic infrustructure, permits, and feasability studies in place. None of that applies to Freewest or Noront at this time.
