If you think my intention was to put an accounting ruler over...

If you think my intention was to put an accounting ruler over the future predictions of SHP, then you have been deeply misinformed. In the very knowledgable discussion I have had with Catalyst, I thought I made it very clear that SHP at this stage is still a speculative stock with significant amounts of risk involved.

Upside will depend on key derisking events whose occurence cannot be forecasted with certainty. For example, the securing of permits, I must give hats off to Chris and the holders who had the risk appetite to see it through. But what if the permits were delayed, or if the company had difficulty in securing them? Too many retail holders are short sighted to see the bigger picture thinking they are immune or that they can take the risk after they see a significant appreciation in share price. And when a speculative event doesn't occur as it was intended and the share price reverses, they are quick to critisize management and other longer term holders of about how bad the stock is. I could point you to numerous studies and data which indicates retail holders have overly optimistic expected returns and over estimate the amount of risk they can take. The thing I hate to see most is retail holders putting in a substantial amount of money which is important to their family and children into sepculative stocks only to realise the significant pain and stress it causes when things turn sour. Recently I saw and mun & dad investor lose $200,000 on Salt Lake Potash (a clear overallocation and an overestimation of risk weighted return). Often its not the company's fault, its the fault of the retail holders themselves

If the company success is behind all these speculative events, of course its going to be risk, and as an investor, I would demand a significant return for that risk and be wary of how much of my portfolio is allocated to that stock. So if that is the case, what is wrong with focusing on the company's operating environment and the longer term picture? Conducting macroeconomic analysis on potash prices, project execution and funding provides valuable insight into the long-term attractiveness of the project (which can attract financing and support) as well as favourable PFS, DFS, and BFS outcomes. These have merits to impacting returns in the short-term for speculative holders and those who want to hold the project through to production.

For example, look at AJM which once a lithium producer in Australia. Project execution was good and the company got into production. But this coincided with supply going online for many other lithium mines making the price of lithium compounds no longer financially viable to produce for a short period of time. What happened to the company, it was liquidated. If AJM wasnt so unlucky with the lithium pricing as it entered production, holders would have saw astronomical returns today. Too many of their shareholders were short sighted and failed to even consider the environment or purely limited their analysis to the internal affairs of the company.

And if you are calling me a neophyte who applies CBA and BHP methodology to spec stocks, I'll gladly take it as a compliment (a note I am not new to spec stocks with the "cowboys" at the smaller end of town). There is a difference between someone who is intelligent and stubborn, and someone who is intelligent and open. I'm sorry if my questions and reasoning came off as stubborn.

An interesting example you brought up abouts dentists as the worst performers in investment though. I wonder why many retail investors and traders consistently underperform the market or suffer losses despite knowing "no boundaries".