E said: "Yes if you follow that particular thread I used the...

E said: "Yes if you follow that particular thread I used the revenues that Md listed from information the company has supplied"

You misuse the information the company supplies. It was never meant to be used in that manner. See ASX release 25/11/14 for details.

If you do, you'll note they make a number of assumptions. Some of the more relevant ones are: US$40.00 sale price, exchange rate of US$0.90:AU$1.00, production rate 2.5 Mlbs

Those numbers were the ones prevailing at that particularly point in time. If they were to do it today, they'd use: US$36.50, 0.75 exchange rate & they'd quote that AGS would receive $122 m. What does that do to your valuation?

From the ASX release, AGS " will receive approximately $110 million for its share of the uranium oxide concentrate production (approximately 2.5 million lbs) over the Period, excluding royalties, converter fees (if any), transportation costs and tax."

Note the exclusions. That further tells you how rubbery your "valuation" is.

E said: "Chris you say "The assumptions in that $110m scenario will NOT play out."

The fact is it is currently playing out"

No, the scenario outlined in ASX release 25/11/14 is not playing out & will NOT play out.

AGS will NOT sell 2.5Mlbs of U into the spot market.
B4M will NOT be mined at 2.5 Mlb for the next 12 years.
Quasar will NOT stockpile for the next 12 years.
AGS will NOT sit on its hands for the next 12 years & do nothing.

E said: "I notice that posters would rather jump on this useful information rather than provided any insight they might have about the tax question I posted."

Your posts can be quite wordy so I tend to skim. I don't recall seeing a question about tax. Post it again & if I know the answer, I'll post.