enamco, page-24

One issue, yeldub, is there is a big dislocate between value of the resource that the company is working toward, and where it currently stands.

There is also a material difference between what people speculate the mine might produce per annum (and the value this would infer / create), what the ESS was based on (as you state, 20% of the resource), and what might eventuate.

In short, a large number of variables and I have no idea how that will feed into value for purposes of this transaction. I do see it as possible (definitely not the only option) that an agreement will be reached based on share of project as per the ESS. So in effect, it excludes everything else for valuation purposes.

Other companies make similar arrangements so I don't see why a government can't.

My comment re $100M was based purely on the ESS. It is not hard to work down to around $100M value (based on profit after tax, not EBITDA!!) by assuming total plant depreciation and full tax.

MJS