I agree with your point, in general terms, and someone with more...

I agree with your point, in general terms, and someone with more expertise might comment, but I suspect if you want to capture high market prices then you want to include the ore that is profitable at higher prices in your resource evaluation and mine planning. You don't want to leave resources in the ground that you believe will be profitable at prices you expect to see. I think, or presume, we'll see more on that in the DFS economics and sensitivities to price and cutoff grade.

I'd also think that if you're following this approach then you'd want flexibility about when you access your best grades and lesser grades and the best and less economic parts of the ore body, dependent on market pricing at any time. And the nature and understanding of the ore body and mine planning work will obviously help or hinder your ability to manage that. If we believe the story here, that's part of the DVP chemistry, being skilled and clever underground mine managers. I think it stands to reason that you can't set up to take advantage of higher prices if your resource and planning exclude ore that may be profitable at higher prices, which you expect will occur. So you get the sort of assumptions included in this announcement - to enable you to plan better. Those who want to be more conservative will, of course, want to back off the sensitivities in their pricing of the stock (or the DFS itself will be more conservative, but demonstrating upside via the sensitivities).

This announcement is primarily about the increase in fresh resource and also about further work completed that will lead to improvements in processing and mine planning, to be included in the DFS, and the announcement is significant for all those reasons. But, I think, with the extra info required by the ASX, we're getting more information on how the company is looking to develop this. And how they're looking to be prepared to take advantage of any shortages and a higher price path.

I'm making some inferences on that and may be inferring too much. But I'm happy if they are including planning to be able to best take advantage of potential higher prices. Probably I should go further and say that it would be disappointing if they weren't taking this approach.

Now, can we smash these 3.62 and 3.70 sellers and carry on ....