So to say they are all garbage shows you know very little about...

So to say they are all garbage shows you know very little about mining and the economics behind it.

Firstly, I did not say they are "all garbage", and you are a fool if you think we are sitting at 3 cents because "we're flying under the radar" or "it's misunderstood" or "it's just having some bad luck" or "it's just sentiment". You need to stop running on hopium and be man enough to admit to yourself that far greater minds than you and any of the other pumpers in this thread have run the ruler over this company long ago and understood the ground they have is mostly marginal to uneconomic. If you truly believe that those greater minds haven't bought in because they don't know of GBZ existence then you need to think a little more rationally. It may have taken me a couple of years but at least I managed to understand what constitutes an economic resource at current gold prices, something that you haven't managed to do.

Every single low MC exploration gold company with over 1.5 m/oz has been slaughtered in the last couple of years,

And yet you still obviously can't comprehend WHY they have all been slaughtered. It's truly ironic, given you then go on to mention the very factors that are making them and GBZ uneconomic, i.e. "depth of the ore body, strip ratios, overburden to be moved etc".

And you and others mentioning miners that are economic at less than 1g/t fail to comprehend that GBZ is simply not in the same league as those companies. If GBZ had similar metrics we would also be a billion-dollar miner. The fact is GBZ doesn't have those favorable metrics, and that is why we have fallen from 20c to 3c.

Most companies are operating with an AISC of $1100-$1200

That is a demonstrably false statement.

I stand by what I said previously: we have maybe 900koz of economic resource at the current gold price. And if the gold price doesn't rise faster than increases in mining costs and inflation then watch the share price fall further.