Actually Primed, we have talked about these things in the past on this Board, and if I recall correctly the general concensus was that if the deposit is as large as we hope it might be, the infrastructure costs will be an insignificant fraction of the purchase price. Therefore the financial impact of establishing infrastructure was not felt to be much of a determining factor in the offer price.

I can't say for sure if that is a valid conclusion or not, but here's my take on it. Logistically, yes, bringing water and power to site will be a challenge. If they can't build a power line, they will use on-site generation - diesel engines, most likely. And for sure they will have to improve the road. These infrastructure upgrades may introduce a higher risk of environmental protest, even before the property can be mined. But back to financial analysis, if the property contains, say, 10M ounces, and they can make $500 profit per ounce after operating expenses (which would include, fuel, water, transportation, power, wages, equipment, etc.) at today's $1500/ounce spot price, that's $5B of potential profit over the life of the mine. If they had to spend $250M on infrastructure to establish a mining operation, that's only five percent of the $5B profit that would come out of the mine over it's lifetime. To me that's a project with a pretty attractive Net Present Value, based only on a 10M ounce deposit.

I know one of the Board members had previously posted the most recent buyout numbers, maybe those can be posted again, and we'll go from there!