Homebrand...You said, "..I have valued [AVB] merely applies a...

Homebrand...

You said, "..I have valued [AVB] merely applies a clinical value of the in-situ resource..."

Respectfully, if that were the case why would you leave out of your analysis, valuable Au credits which are now JORC complient? Put differently, your so-called "clinical value" left completely out by you...excluded 389,000 oz of Au or US$641 million of future DCF over the 10 year mine life...

You also said, "...the "rule of thumb" JORC classification, where reserves can attract up to 6%, but Inferred around 1%..." [say 4%]

Since we are now post maiden JORC, using your own classification regime, with the addition of Pedro Blanco numbers, I would say we are closer to 6% than 1%...with addition of valuable Au credits takes your AVB "rule of thumb" valuation of AVB to $162 million...
[641m + 8500x401,000] x 4%....

You said, "...It also does not take into account the fact we dont have a BFS/DFS, funding. (all very big discounts to a DFC valuation)..."

Respectfully, all my NPV insitu valuations valuing all AVB's gross revenue streams over the 10 year mine life of a median value of 40,000 tonnes per annum...valuing AVB NPV at 90 cents...have included all projected CAPEX and OPEX estimates, including further estimated dillution to cover Capital Raising...
[Post: 7617671; Posted: 11/01/12 03:49]

You said, "...This does not take into account the risks that you have pointed out, like management..."
I think the new Xstrata appointee to AVB's board, might disagree...

Again, Homebrand I always appreciate reading your informative posts, but on a couple of points here we may have to agree to disagree...

Cheers