something special..., page-60

re: something special t4p... TwinTurboCelica...

I think you missed the point...and no, I will not be drawn into personal insult.

My "value" model for MMB is based on more than just the obvious clinical resource potential...as I said, so much more to applying market value, or at least the perception thereof.

Not sure why you are on the attack here…I have not questioned the potential of TRO...but to put it very simply for you, there are other forces at play in this stock, which you yourself allude to...there also other issues which you clearly do not comprehend.

I think you are getting caught up in the comparison play...always a worthwhile exercise, but a long way from an exact science.

How much is known about TRO's resource and how much is not? This is something you should consider when making your comparisons...and when doing so, ask yourself how much is known about MMB's resource and how much is not?

Same goes for other stocks in a similar boat...we need to consider how much is likely still to be uncovered and what is the potential blue-sky upside? Such considerations can have a major impact on market perception and sentiment...and we all know how important this can be.

I also discussed market influences in my reply which you either did not understand or simply ignored...I suggest if TRO were listed overseas, it would have a market cap twice what it is on ours for the very same resource...think about that for a minute.

Further...as I suggested, blue sky is a very powerful market driver; how much unknown upside (in multiples of the current share price) do you personally see available for TRO...and when is it likely to be realised for market participants?

With respect, you seem overly focused on TRO to the point you are missing some very important value issues. I guess this is perhaps understandable given their likely inherent value, but it might be worth your while listening to a non-involved (currently) market participant who is doing nothing more than voicing an opinion on the current state of play.

I understand this can be very hard to do however…and by the way, I did not volunteer this opinion, you extracted it from me.

Finally, dilution is one of the most critical factors when applying "value"...if the production route will result in a doubling of shares on issue to fund the cap ex, then you can half the perceived "value" of the shares immediately, such are the forward projection characteristics of the market players.

The very same players who will likely support the future fund raisings.

However…remove the need for future dilution and you do not get the same discount imposition on today’s share price.

Anyway, back to my arbitrary number for MMB...the "10% in ground value" is not something I would apply accross the boards (I have already suggested this several times), but given the specifics of what I suspect MMB will prove up, and given my best guess estimates (this far in advance)…and taking into account the other influencing factors likely to impact on their market cap, I feel 10% of the likely "announced" resource will be appropriate once (if) the current drill program clarifies for the market the nature of what potentially lies beneath.

Cheers!