Ann: Quarterly Activities Report, page-67

@Deboss ..... If you go back to the report the NPV was based on numbers supplied by WFE. This invalidates the valuation as 'independent' for the purposes of inclusion in the prospectus.

Nowhere did Mr Connelly state that he agreed with those supplied numbers.
He made comment about the processing costs being 'reasonable' but not any other metrics of the supplied numbers.

Also part of any feasibility study are the metallurgical results, something that has not happened on the proposed ore. Before anyone can work out whether an operation is going to be profitable, research/testing needs to be carried out on the ore (and the mix from 7 different deposits), to make sure of recoveries, deliterious elements etc. Without this there is no hope of working out if running a process is going to be profitable or not.

There is an enormous amount of work that needs to be done to work out if an operation like this has a chance of being profitable, work that has just not been done in this case.

There is a very good reason why companies follow the path of feasibility studies, apart from rules for ASX. Even companies that don't need to raise capital still go down this path, like Oz Minerals with several projects.

Whether it is a new resource, or buying the ore in, a company still needs to test for the best method to process that particular ore. Look at every gold miner in WA. Even though they all have pretty much the same ore types, there are always slight differences in ore character, so companies run the full metallurgical tests before designing the process plant, or changing the process plant if they bought an old one.

There is a whole lot of wishful thinking involved with this company, lots of nice positive announcements, but very little of the required work necessary IMHO. The proposed ore should have been thoroughly tested from the moment the contracts were signed to obtain it, yet it hasn't happened, or there would have been an announcement stating the results of the metallurgical testing, because of continuous disclosure.

How many times have people on this forum stated that all was happening 'soon' only to find nothing progressed. Why would now be any different to the last half dozen times of inaction??