RE: You will note we get nothing/Gas"I have to take issue with your assertion that their (BoD's) only objective is to increase NAV however."
Fullofgas.... I didn't say that... instead I wrote: "... the BoD's PRIMARY responsibility is to increase shareholder value and the way to do that in a mining venture is to increase the net asset value of that venture."
Reading the remainder of your post, it does seem that we are pretty much in agreement. As for KRY, well that's the Venezuelan risk factored in. I've run into similar problems with my MUN holdings (gold in China, gov't revoked operating license, trading way under nav).
As for PAT's low market s/p, I'm not too worried because, along with most others here, I agree that Pat's nav is quite a bit north of 65c. Furthermore, management has made it public that Pat is now for sale at $1.10. Yet so far, for some reason, no company has stepped up to match that price. Why is that? We have to remember that the potential buyer is buying Pat's assets (primarily IG); they are NOT buying the Pat BoD. Therefore the only conclusion one can reach is that potential buyers think that the current Pat is NOT a screaming value at $1.10; otherwise they would be lining up and outbidding each other, as is happening with a number of Cdn resource companies these days. Maybe the suitors don't like the 45% minority interest sharing agreement with Richmont; although that shouldn't preclude Richmont itself from buying up the remaining 45% share, lol.
Despite this, fwiw I think there will be a catalyst one of these days for PAT's s/p. Either a buyout offer will happen ( Ric?) or barring that, then we'll have to wait until the cashflow story here becomes so compelling that the market has to take notice; maximum two years I figure. Right now it's still early days (not even in commercial production yet). I'm prepared to wait.
Just my thoughts. Cheers.