Is it worth 4.9 cent a share?, page-15

They are so caught up in protecting their ideology of in-ground grade reigning supreme that they aren't willing to consider any of the other variables at play here.

Processing methods have improved vastly from traditional salt-roasting techniques which both TMT/AVL boast, and yes for their deposit this method works quite well. Some research will show the success some mining operations are already having with heap leaching lump ore, and as stated in the mining journal article reposted yesterday the entire Speewah project could potentially be mined as a bulk earth moving exercise.

This possibility is something very unique to KRC, given the flat/low lying homogenous nature of our deposit like you mentioned.

And no one seems to mention the 1,000 year mine life more often than these non-holders, and as if its a curse? TMT are currently spending money on drilling to extend their LOM from a mere 13 years. Although a 1,000 mine life when discounted is less impactful, KRC can simply report on a 20 year.. 30 year.. 40 year.. or even 50 year mine life which will improve NPV results significantly.

Additionally we don't have to waist anymore cash drilling to increase the scope of our V resource. If they were so certain that our project is worthless would they really be taking the time to post their thoughts here?

One minute all low grade deposits should be valued at $0 (according to these experts), then the next minute TNG who they proclaim will never get off the ground can justify a $100m MCAP off the back of a dfs.. Their logic is skewed and full on contradictions. If their investment mandate gravitates towards the relatively lower-risk plays then so be it, KRC in comparison may or may not be a higher risk play but certainly offers much greater upside potential.