RE:ScorecardMy conclusion is you probably have not included Anaconda because it is a producer. However, it is also actively exploring and increasing their reserves. They are getting some good results as well with decent grades. They have a MC of $106 million today. Marathon also does not belong on this list because it is a mature exploration company that has reserves that have been drilled sufficiently to designate the majority of those tonnes as measured or proven. Marathon has feasibility study done and are well on the way to building the mine and getting final permits. They also just recently had a market cap of $680 million but they will languish in share price until they get bought or become a profitable producer.
The other three companies are in their infancy and are adjacent to another. They have no reserves or resources defined. NFG has had remarkable results over large areas and no doubt will be much larger than Marathon but right now their information requires a lot of guesswork and even the company states that actual widths are are believed to be 70% of core. LAB hasn't even had a hole drilled and reported yet and has an MC larger than SIC which has had a fair number of holes reported with some wicked intersections. Does not make sense, except it is closer to NFG and is caught up in the euphoria that NFG is the real deal. So, I get comparing NFG with the two adjacent properties, as well as pointing out SIC is not fairly valued compared to either of the neighbours.