RE:RE:RE:RE:Why keep the price down ?The focus is the top 400 to 500 meters of depth and at least 2000 meters of strike or whatever they can squeeze into a resouce model using 400 holes which is the current amount of drilling budgeted for. The LP is massive already at 4000 meters of strike by 500 meters deep and I don't think you can actually put all of that dirt into a resource category with only 400 holes.
And as the analyst at Mackie suggested the maximum pit depth based on grades/ strip ratios etc. would be around 500 meters so it makes sense that we define a resource that can be mined open pit first and then plan a program to go deeper second.
Now that we're raising an additional $ 70 Million I suspect we will increase the number of drills, some to go below 500 meters to define a seperate underground resource model at the LP and the others to start drilling deeper at the Hinge/Limb to define a resource there and other drills to continue looking for other targets such as Arrow etc.
Some have suggested we may have as many as 12 drills turning later this year.
Another thing about an early takeover attempt, I suspect that the moment that happened all the analysts and plenty of others would start buying the stock higher than $ 21 knowing that:
1) Management would reject the offer and wage a huge campaign against it forsing the buyer to make a higher offer and :
2) a low ball offer would surely cause other majors to launch counter offers higher than $ 21.
So a low ball offer would do nothing more than start a feeding frenzy.
Ultimately the stock would be taken out but not at $ 21 but maybe more like $ 30
Again that would be a very high risk bet so I think it's more likely that we finish our first phase of the 400 holes and come up with at least some solid resource # before anyone launches a takeover and that's still 6 to 9 months away.
diabase1 wrote: I would prefer $30+ too, but most companies who are interested in GBR have already done their gold resource calculations, based on 4.2 km of the LP Fault. To the NW and SE, I believe the widths are much narrower. It is regrettable that GBR hasn't released more assays at depth. Is it because the widths are thinning out too??