RE:RE:RE:RE:Best visual mineralization seen to datefigtrader wrote:
Irrational conclusion.
Perhaps you mean 'illogical' rather than 'irrational'? For example, one might call it irrational to try refuting a numerate comment with an innumerate comment. However, I did make an error in logic, and that was not adjusting ROI downward for depletion.
.
figtrader wrote:
The resource tonnage continues to escalate on drilling on both Mpama North & South.
If you are reading from an resource estimate when the construction started on the mine, Mpama North resource alone has dramatically increased since then and Mpama South a wild guess.
Yes, all else remaining the same, increased tonnage would help ROI. I will check forecasts of tonnage vs LOM and make sure I'm up to date. Thanks for mentioning that.
.
figtrader wrote:
LOM (life of mine) will be decades depending how fast they expand production.
All else remaining the same, increasing LOM does not affect annual ROI; it only affects cumulative ROI, which is not normally of interest to small investors like us. Something else must improve, such as external costs, grade, tonnage, or metal price. And if ROI begins low (as is the case here), the improvements must be substantive.
As an aside, I have not seen much (if any) numerate commentary on this bullboard. Is this normal? Being somewhat selfish, I'd rather not bother offering numerate analysis if there will never be quid pro quo.