Have no problems with your numbers but they're lousy for a...

Have no problems with your numbers but they're lousy for a precious metals miner....they're fine for an industrial but we're talking about a cyclical miner here that is dependent on the volatile price of the commodity it produces. What you pay for an asset....it's underlying value is what matters- that's what drives returns. No resource projects get sanctioned for a 10% yield. Ever. So why buy into that? I contend it is expensive and they massively overpaid. They're betting on a much higher gold price going forward for this to work out- that's the stuff of casinos, not prudent investment. The Board have reached into your pocket emptied it of cash and handed it over to IGO shareholders & the institutional investors that have come aboard. It's all been at the expense of current equity holders. You might think this deal is fine and that's ok for you. I don't for the reasons I've said. Overpaying never delivers value. Look at the Board & CEO share holdings, only one has a holding that aligns their interests with yours. They're not invested- literally not invested. The share price is telling you this is a bad deal- the value of your equity here has been decimated. Adding ounces/cash flow you say is a positive. Yes & no....because what you pay for them is everything. They have purchased a very expensive revenue stream that has destroyed the current and future developmental latent value embedded in the company prior to the deal. Yes, raw earnings numbers will increase but returns on equity will be slashed. A bigger pie split amongst a vastly larger numbers of equity holders. I've never known where that was ever a good thing. My successful investments come where returns on equity increase, not decrease. That is empire building at its worst. Bigger is not always better. That's what's being served up here. It's that simple for me.