I think the posts of those who provide useful critical analysis...

I think the posts of those who provide useful critical analysis need to be respected, regardless of sentiment or position. That is the whole point for me of HC discussion. I think The Captain, Johno, Le Derp and others make some key points about the PFS, regardless of whether some want to hear them or not. After all, investment decisions about capital allocation are all about relative choices.

IMO, the PFS was below market expectations for the following reasons (as some have pointed out previously, the devil is always in the details):

- Smaller resource used than anticipated (shorter LOM)

- High capital cost (always likely in PNG highlands) not countered by long enough LOM as yet

- POG assumptions higher than most companies, yet still delivering relatively low pre-tax IRR and long payback period. IMO need to see a post-tax IRR at 30+% and payback <3 yrs for potential project financiers to be relaxed and comfortable

For me, IMO it's underdone - back in the oven for 12 months to see how it's shaping up them (a lot of work on the resource yet to do, and that will take time and money). Not to say the future potential isn't there, but it's not on paper yet.

I think Surly's points are key for me too: details re scope of potential resource upgrade and new discovery, and whilst it is good a PFS has been completed, until those details are known and how that might factor into the PFS, my sentiment changes to a hold, and I can entirely understand those with a ST horizon moving to sell. Also, as Surly notes, it all depends on your buy price, so it might be a completely different equation for different holders from that perspective.

We'll see what the coming months bring.

GLTA