Hello Justin D, math you want? I went back and copied a post I did awhile ago. But I'll never change from 1g/T & $150 per OZ in the ground. Just to be ultra conservative. The scaling we do, makes it even more ultra conservative.
As well, remember, from a post I did not too long ago, when we say 1g/T over the anomaly, and with the scaling to such an extreme, really what we're saying again is this:
1) There is 1g/T over 29% of the anomaly OR
2) There is an average of 0.29g/T over the entire anomaly OR
3) Any combination of the above 2
To me that is very very likely (IMO)
Anyway here's that post, and you can punch in your own numbers, or thoughts. I really try to keep the math in perspective, and always try to remind all, this is no doubt speculation till things get proven!
I don't want to clutter this post with formulas, and a bunch of numbers. From a previous post, I came up with a share value of $133 per share (based on 102 Million OZ in the ground)! In that formula, there are 3 variables in the formula, I'd like to look at:
-
The Volume:This volume is only the one anomaly. The Zona Central anomaly, which is 1800M X 1700M X 1300M, which is more than likely open @ depth as well. That's it one anomaly! So, is this conservative?
-
The Estimated Grams per Ton:I used only 1g/T, even though the bulk sampling average was 29g/T. As well, they've had some incredible samples since this average that are not accounted for. So, is this conservative?
-
The Price per OZ in the Ground:I used only $150 per OZ in the ground. If you take the Fronteer, Ventana, Andean, & Aurelian takeouts, the average price payed in the ground adjusted to todays gold price is $769 per OZ! I only added Aurelian because the price was so low, just to bring the average down, and allow shareholders once again to remember the Aurelian story. It would be easy to leave this example out & drive all these prices up, but I want to actually drive them down! So, is this conservative?
So, if you look at these three points, I really think they are all conservative, and you still came out to $133 per share. IMO You can easily say there has to be 2g/T, especially when the average is 29g/T, and the price would have to be $300 per OZ not $150, especially when the average is $769. So, that's a factor of at least 4!
Bottom Line, what's 4 X $133 per share AND, you have to admit, it still seems conservative!
