fedexpress says 10 or 15mil pounds, page-16

It is fruitless to compare AGS to MTN.

Whilst each company is sitting on a monster resource, that is where the comparison ends. The dynamics of each could not be further apart.

So whilst I am comfortable with the valuation of AGS, I believe it is degrading to AGS to compare it to MTN... which has a longer way to go in this race.

B4M is a resource that has completely different extraction parameters to Mt. Gee.
Amongst these, Coffey have already confirmed that the MOST viable extraction method of Mt. Gee will be underground mining... which has HUGE overheads. B4M is sandstone hosted roll front type depoist which could be mined ISL, or by open pit... much cheaper than underground mining.
Not too mention the existing mine license, free-carried etc that AGS enjoys.
I can't be bothered going into all of this over again, as they have been covered ad nauseum on these threads.

I am not downramping MTN in the slightest, my comment was simply aimed at distinguishing between comparing a near-term producer (and all the market attached premiums that go with it) in AGS, with a much longer term producer in MTN.

Do you or Fedex REALLY think that the market has got AGS wrong?

The grades have been like nothing else found in Australia thus far... and there is $14 million worth of drilling results still to come this year.

Fedex has tried to juxtapose CUY with MTN in the same way that he has done with AGS.

CUY is in a similar boat to AGS in that they are trial mining this year. Whilst CUY is answerable to the 3-mines red-tape, they will be ready to go sooner than just about any other co. in Oz.

Once and for all... MTN is a good stock, but it is useless to whinge and whine about it's market cap compared to others when they are at such different stages in their evolution.