jorc for the west, page-9

zed....that is not the way to value a U co. IMHO.

Take the average price per lb in the ground of near term producers....say $20.
(You don't use the spot price as that doesn't allow any deduction for mining costs.)

So, using your hoped for resource of 100M lbs, AGS share is 25M lbs (25% of 100M).
25Mlbs@$20 (20 is reasonably high)=500 M/Cap.
Divide by shares (your figure above indicates you are using 250M shares...is that fully diluted?)
=$2 a share.
(500M/250)

Currently AGS rated/priced at higher than 100M lbs it seems.
Perhaps the total lbs will be higher than that in time....to justify the current share price.

As a comparison MTN has 70M lbs, soon to be upgraded to probably 100M.
It is currently valued at around $4 per lb, not 20+.
I realise AGS will mine 1st, but discount for MTN is way out of whack IMHO, taking into account perceived enviro risk and underground mining probability.
However, AGS has the media spotlight for now, and the sheeple will hear about it before MTN.

Both have there +'s and -'s, but MTN looks better value to me.

(Surprised that other AGS posters have not pointed out that zed's calculations using spot price are inappropriate.)