Thoughtsyou can read the Albert Little report here:
https://labemp.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/silvercorp-metals-final-report.pdf
First he argues about tonnage discrepencies, and gives a table, and a link to the translated document.
Her'es the translatino:
The 2005 report about the mine has shown that it has a resource reserve of 1.4639 million tons in the (111b)+(331)+(332)+(333) area, including 65,359.96 tons of lead, 37,778.84 tons of zinc and 324.76 tons of silver. The 2009 dynamic reconnaissance has shown that it has a resource reserve of 1,463,900 tons in the (111b)+(331)+(332)+(333) area, in which the 534,831 tons in the (111b) area has been used and the 929,069 tons in the (331)+(332)+(333) area are reserved, including 41,208.30 tons of lead, 23,111.95 tons of zinc and 198.31 tons of silver.
This dynamic reconnaissance report (for year ended 2010) estimates that it has a resource reserve of 1,463,900 tons in the (111b)+(331)+(332)+(333) area, in which the 207,037 tons in the (111b) area are used during this year, including 5,911.40 tons of lead, 5,162.80 tons of zinc and 32.17 tons of silver. Totally 741,868 tons in the (111b) area are used up to date, including 30,063.06 tons of lead, 19,829.69 tons of zinc and 158.62 tons of silver. The 722,032 tons in the (331)+(332)+(333) area are reserved, including 35,296.90 tons of lead, 17,949.15 tons of zinc and 166.14 tons of silver.
Notice how 32.17 tons of silver is for the 111b area! But Albert Little failed to include silver from the 331, 332, and 333 area (166.14 ton * highlighted orange) in his table
Moreover, it says that SVM Ying mine has narrow veins, which would make the operation uneconomical. Yet SVM has made over 200M [1] on it's 4 properties, and Ying played a large part.
https://silvercorpmetals.com/attachments/attachment_d.pdf
So if the mine operation was uneconomical, and the head grades poor, how can the shorts explain 200M in profits? So either the mine is economical, or SVM wouldn't have 200M in its account, assuming the 200M was generated by the mine--It's a huge assumption--but let's be charitable to SVM
And what about the low truck count?
We don't know what days the 'observers' were observing the mine. So if they were 'observing' the mine over the Chinese New Year, when the mine operation would likely be scaled back, it would give a biased sample. But maybe that's what the shorters intended.
Anyways.. Good luck out there.. I'll be accumulating my second position if/when SVM keeps tanking.