independent export guilty of understatement, page-3

Yes Corporate, I agree with your comments, and this is what should have been discussed, and valued, by the Independent Expert (IE).

The IE is charged with the duty of determining a fair valuation for the assets of the company.

The P90 and P10 probabilities of Auriga's potential resources would have been estimated by Nexus, certainly their best P50 estimate of the potential resources, along with their range of probabilities of discovery and probability of success were published.

As Corporate points out, "success" is rather a loose term, but I think that the least possible interpretation of success would be the lesser of the P50 estimate or being a commercially positive volume.

My argument put to Deloitte, is why weren't these factors included in the financial modelling to ascertain possible ranges of value and then discounted by an appropriate risk factor.

Deloitte simply state that this was not undertaken!
I don't believe that their valuation (using their P50 valuation methodology) of around $1.5m each is a fair valuation for the Auriga or Caelum assets, and this was raised in my letter to Deloitte.

As to funding. $10m for Nexus' portion of drilling Auriga is not a big hurdle, but as we know there are many other hurdles in quick succession.

Clearly, either shareholders contribute to a capital raising, which wasn't sought, or the Board must seek other avenues. The board have gone to great lengths to explain to shareholders the steps that they undertook.

The funding and valuation, I believe, are separate issues. I cannot make judgement on any valuation, only raise questions to those charged with making these assessments.

By nature, I would expect an Independent Expert to be conservative. The point of my posting last night was to highlight what I think is an extreme of conservatism.