General Chat, page-7629

Every company will have a different risk tolerance.

If they have the cash available for acquisitions, then they can decide which target assets meet their preferences/criteria.

1. Alaska? Will suit some companies. Especially ones with experience there.
2. SS2 vs PFS vs BFS vs producing asset. I'd guess majors are the ones acquiring BFS/producing assets vs minors acquiring semi-proven resources.
3. Do the economics and risks stack up vs the price. Now we're actually cheaper than when the assets were less proven.
4. Does it suit their mining/processing experience.

Gold rising might accelerate industry acquisitions a bit, and every time we progress to a new stage, there's more companies who will pass the ruler over us. Probably not that many companies are interested in a <0.3g/t bulk resource, with plans of ore sorting, if they don't have experience in that themselves - especially at SS2 stage. As the company mentioned, some potential partners want us to do a test pit to prove that the sorting works.

See how we were very risky at inferred stage. RPM got downgraded from its peak... We're gradually becoming less risky. Better proven resources, and a more optimised and locked in plan.