Mission,I believe my expectation would be that that company...

Mission,

I believe my expectation would be that that company would trickle back something more like $30 over a period of years. I can then reinvest it myself for growth of my portfolio.

Where a company is able to reinvest the cash well, then I am happy for the dividend paying phase of the company to be deferred - I believe this is still appropriate wrt PNA, but not in the case of OZL which is treading a middle path ATM, IMHO retaining just sufficient to cater for a "forseeable" acquisition. I am a little ambivalent but acknowledge that the alternative of a subsequent CR typically disadvantages ordinary shareholders more than the lost earnings on the cash held.

If I've understood correctly the above PNA/OZL chart doesn't correct for the dividends of capital return? Surely however that explains most of the divergence?

I prefer a balance sheet looking more like PNAs than OZLs but if I was in TBs shoes I suspect I'd be doing similar - who knows what opportunities the next 6 or 12 months might bring.

As for someone's comment about block caving being expensive I suspect we need to acknowledge that more and more copper is going to come from more "expensive" sources, and that advances in block caving are surely likely to improve the relative economics a bit before we start? I am no mining professional but I am prepared to put some trust in the apparently sober hands of TB in these matters.

EL