RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: common senseMy understanding of the relationship is that TECK owned the property first.
They were also fully engaged in the nearby Galore Creek project.
They basically hired CUU to find out if the Schaft claims were worth pursuing, and agreed to the terms we are groping to understand, including relinquishing their interest if they were not satisfied with the potential as set out in a BFS.
The incentives for CUU were their right to keep the property if TECK opted not to participate further, or granting CUU the various levels of participation set out in the back in agreement.
The value to CUU shareholders is the participation in whatever portion TECK does not take.
It is pretty much the concensus here that TECK will be nuts to not take the full measure of their back in agreement, and probably, buy back the fractional interest that CUU gets to retain.
And yes, the value of that fractional interest is very much a function of the ongoing exploration, but it is also a generally held belief that the amount of resources already identified give the fractional interest a value substantially above what the market is giving it now.
It is my opinion that because of the complexity of the above, the market is tending to avoid the shares due to a failure to do the DD and figure out what CUU is worth after the calculations.
It is probably going to require an action on the part of TECK to allow the shares to achieve any sort of rational market valuation.
However, I also believe it is precisely because it is so complicated that we have the opportunity to buy this thing at these prices.