RE: Value27 Jul 2021 12:14
Mr Stork, I don't like to see the abuse you seem to get on this BB, so don't take this as my jumping on a bullying bandwagon, but... you've posted that report twice now. I can read - just. I can do some of the numbers (I'm better with the odd ones than the even ones), and I liked the minimalist pictures. But... I can't see how some self-acknowledged scant and dated data from South Africa is hugely relevant to a discount that should be applied to EUA's superior quality product, ideally located near processing facilities and run by a team of absolute pro's, who have even ensured the Russian government have agreed their "share" in advance, rather than dipping in later.
From pages 33-35, as recommended:
"Finally, although there is anecdotal visual evidence of the equity markets discounting future
exploration success, given the number of data points in the population, this could not be said to be
statistically significant), although, in the case of PGMs, it may be that the relationship is linear (as in
2017), rather than the more commonly observed inverted relationship. However, the consolation of
this is that it may then be possible for managements to add value to junior PGM exploration
companies by increasing their resources if conducted at an appropriate cost.
No multiple regression analysis was performed for PGM juniors in 2018 – not least owing to the
paucity of available data. Nevertheless, we hope to add this in future years. "
Dunno - but I wouldn't set a huge amount of store in that. I do generally like Storks, though. GLA.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
