Hi guys, I do think this is a better result in many aspects like...

Hi guys,

I do think this is a better result in many aspects like ASIC etc, but I do think this is a no go. 5-7 years with a 2.8 year mine pay back leaves very very few years to actually make money.

in a bear case 5-2.8 = 2.2 years of profit before the mine goes onto care and maintenance

That is an awful bear case and if silver prices are low for only TWO years they make 0 money
In the best case they get 7-2.8 = 4.2 which is mediocre at best
If Silver is sitting at current prices of $22 USD an ounce, they will make practically no money over life of mine

Compared to the competition,
SVL are 17 years, with a fraction of the inferred in indicated and a scoping study for underground expansions with a similar ASIC
IVR can't compete or ASIC, resource size, exploration potential only on approvals do they have an easier road

I think IVR is making a mistake going to DFS. A year of aggressive drilling with a minimum 50-75% increase in the resource would be needed at Minimum to make this a competitive and premier silver project.

At that mine life there are other stocks which produce more silver as a by-product than IVR right now and I can't see this attracting much attention from institutions sadly.

Andrew himslef in a Crux Investor Interview said that a 10 year mine life is the MINIMUM most insitutions will require for funding. This project is just way too small.