Randall: I think we cannot get fair valuation because GPGI has chosen not to do a standard sampling and assaying of the ores. The reason they have not done that, IMHO, is that the nornal fire assays did not return the values that GPGI's (and I believe the U. of Colorado, if memory serves) got by non fire assay methods. Few years back, the State Bureau of mines (or a similar body) questioned the results that GPGI was getting and got the SEC involved, and they must have struck a deal (conjecture on my part) either you do it our way or you cannot use it for valuation. Then Jensen must have decided lets get the metal out and with few backers that believe in the results (probably because they have seen some independent assays by non traditional methods) he is doing the job.
Mind you, even now GPGI's results do not match the refinery values, and after GPGI was "royally screwed" by the Belgians (Union Miniere?) in 1994, Jensen said, no more, I'll do it my way.
Until he can get statistical assays on the whole property, it will be difficult for GPGI to get fair valuation (see the trouble Naxos run in and the efforts IPMCF is expending persuading the world they have .25 oz/ton). Guess how believable and the kind of scrutiny GPGI will get coming out and saying we have few ounces per ton of goodies of so many million tons etc. So, they limit their announcements to want they actually did, and everytime they warn us not to extrapolate these results to the whole stockpile, and they keep completely mum on the rest of the property. This way they keep in the clear.
Now, rational investors need to reach their own conclusions with, admitedly, very limited information. This is why we are all trashing the little available data back and forth. What surprises me the most is that we did not get a visit on this thread from CL calling me "ignorant" as yet, and frankly if he did, I would be the first to admit that indeed, I am.
Zeev |
