Mark,

It's good that there not much change in the recommendations and price targets. But, I don't quite understand the rationale behind the analysts' re-evaluations of PRB deposit (why not just wait for a new updated numbers and then discuss, as Thistime indicated).

The updated report would be available soon and it's being done by professionals whose are qualified to produce such report. I don't think the "analysts" are up to that caliber. And besides, they don't have all the detailed data to crank out a credible report. They are certainly entitled to review, comment and criticize the report, just like us some of whom are quite knowledgeable in this field, and perhaps even more knowledgeable than some of the so-called analysts. It would be more appropriate, in my opinion to wait for the new report to come out rather than shoot from the hip using their guesstimate, impression, feeling, etc.

It's customary to choose a cut off value of 0.3 g/t in a resource estimate, and it has been done for many companies, including companies in the same area with comparable grades such as TRR, Osisko, etc. Sensitivity with different cut-off grade would normally included in the 101 report for evaluating the potential for mining sequence, mine high grade first to get some good initial cash flow going for funding the operation. Quite often, they use this information to have various open pit shell designs as part of their feasibility assessment.

In the case of PRB, just by looking at the latest data, better grades seem to be located to the NE (the blue zone on the air survey map) and at depth (but not that deep though, around 400m). So, my inclination would be to locate the centre of the pit there to mine the high grade deposit first then recover the lower grades later (they could also be stockpiled for future processing).

If the analysts want to play with the cut-off grade for the purpose of estimating the size of the deposit (the ozAuEq) then they would need to do that for all companies, at least for those in the same areas, e.g. TRR, LSG, Osisko, to be consistent in their approach...i.e., don't just pick on PRB.

There are many low grade high tonnage operations around and they are making money with grade like 0.4g/t Au. Newmont's Gold Quarry in Nevada is making profit at 0.24g/t.

There must be some hidden agenda for this re-evaluation of PRB based on cut-off grade.

Just wondering.

goldhunter