"That logic means RRL would/should have the capacity to overpay...

"That logic means RRL would/should have the capacity to overpay market value for any proven & producing assets.....somehow that doesn't gel"

I really don't think you can understand how an auction works. When you are in an auction you go through a process where competitors fall out along the way and if you are he highest bidder you get the asset. Taking you logic every competitor who dropped out you will have overpaid. I look upon it differently - all an auction says is that the asset is worth more to the winner than others who dropped out. This happens every time there is an auction it's just that the asset is worth more to the winner than others - not that the winner has overpaid. In RRL case they needed to dilute the hedges they had with Macquarie and move their production up by 100kozs to put them just below 500kozs (which with McP would put them just under 700kozs).

Tropicana is also a cash producing resource NOW and counts to RRL's bottom line NOW - you really can't compare it to developing a new resource of buying up an old mine (they say old mines never die they just get deeper). The problems with old mines is that as they get deeper they also get more expensive - which can still work in a rising gold price environment but is risk, more capex and like an "English gentleman" takes TIME. Tropicana is also an asset with prospects - IGO/Anglogold had spent a lot on exploration - it's risk but would have been closely examined during due diligence - hopefully RRL did their homework.

An issue I don't think has been fully appreciated by the market is that as production goes up value multiples also increase - this means that RRL's competitors in the auction also need to be of a status to raise the $1bn required and also have to ability to get up to the production levels which justify that payment. In RRL's case they also had a legacy hedge issue which needed to be resolved - Tropicana did that.

To get up to the multiples that companies like EVN have they also need McPhilly but that will also need capex and TIME - I have to hope that this will come through - i realize that's a risk but hopefully RRL are confident. McPhlly will hopefully come through in time - any company can only do so much development at any one time (and within its resources) without getting indigestion - the advantage of Tropicana to RRL was that it allowed them to increase production without indigestion and cover a bad hedge situation in one go - IMO that's why they paid a bit over the odds and it was worth it to them.

From my perspective I was not a shareholder before the Tropicana bid and did not carry the pre-Tropicana legacy valuation - this is a problem faced by many shareholders; they find it impossible to forget what they paid - the only one who worries about that is themselves. To a new shareholder (like me) their sales create an opportunity - all I have to consider is it good value NOW - I'm not too concerned about what others paid prior to the Tropicana bid but their sales (hopefully) creates good value for me; thanks.