Thanks @Joelstar that makes a lot of sense. I was aware that...

Thanks @Joelstar that makes a lot of sense.

I was aware that Edna May production was ending soon from your previous posts, but I hadn't thought about the plant equipment that might become available. This adds a lot more weight to the RMS TO scenario.

So it is looking more like "when" rather than "if". By focusing on drilling you leave it to the next guy to sort the mill out. Kind of sad from a retail shareholder perspective, but I get the pragmatism. The distinct possibility of a quick asset turnover could seem more attractive than the longer haul of mining it yourself. This makes more sense of his comments at the recent presentation, the slow movement toward mining and the vague comments from the video above.

I was thinking more about this overnight and while I get that drilling a resource is a value driver it is not the only one. Heading into production is also a value driver, but I guess it takes a different skill set and is maybe seen as a harder route. Certainly there is always the risk of issues during ramp up etc. However, when it comes together it can have a huge impact. I remember Pilbara Mineral's run from resource definition to production. Different commodity but they executed well. I had a small holding from around .36 cents and sold for over $4.50. Ken did an excellent job, but I'm sure it wasn't easy. Having said that he had to start from scratch which is a very different situation to what we find ourselves in.

In an earlier post I said I couldn't think of another situation comparable to ours, and in terms of resource quality I can't. However, in terms of methodology I've really liked the look of MEK's approach (not cross promoting). I took a small position a while ago and have been really impressed with their drive toward mining, while still drill out the resource. Their communication has been excellent. I was a bit thrown by the initial funding method, but even that they were prepared to revamp. While there is still the risk of issues as they move to production, at least they can potentially fund further exploration and development via gold production rather than shareholder capital. It's funny, I was in and out of Meekatharra when Doray discovered and developed Andy Well, so it is kind of nostalgic to see it head into production again.

My point is simply that production can also be a driver of value, and I wonder if part of the malaise in our share price could have been avoided if we had a clear 2 track approach, drill the resource and at the same time have a plan (at least) to head into production as soon as possible? Such an approach could easily have had even more impact in a high gold price environment like we are in at the moment. Instead, I suspect the messaging around production that seems to put it out further and further has had a negative rather than a positive effect on the value proposition that is SPR.

Anyway, sorry for the rambling. This is a forum, a place to share ideas, so I figured I may as well think this through out loud here as I process it all. Investing in SPR has been a good experience so far, I am not complaining. However, I am trying to learn with each investment, and there is a lot to think through and learn from here.

Thanks to all those who have contributed to the SPR thread, it has been one of the best on Hot Copper, to the point that I hardly read any others. Thanks to @Joelstar and @speculator101 in particular who have been here for a long time and contributed so much.

Kind regards.