I guess your main point is showing that there's value given two competing projects to a suitor that SC has potential that's not readily shown - and because of that it would be the better buy. It also applies more to those less familiar with the project (i.e. not Teck). This is fair. I guess terminology and using "NPV" since it indicates...present value is the main concern.

I would have no idea how to value it either and it's why I mentioned it would be acknolwedged, but wouldn't get anything close to what something would be if it was included in an NPV calculation. I think it's similar to comparing inferred and indicated - inferred will be acknowled (as would "phase 2") but it would, none the less not represent as much value and would essentially at the end of the day still be "given away for free".

That all said, I'm not sure that this style of approach has been taken as management hasn't indicated it - though I'm sure they'll still be debating the fact that we have a "mine underneath a mine" that doesn't get properly valued regardless of how it's presented.