I've mentioned a few times in the past that they have the...

I've mentioned a few times in the past that they have the deepest gold mine in Australia and the ore crusher can only run 5/7 because of the time it takes the ore to reach the surface. Also, the cost of the concrete infill was already about half of their production costs when I was there 2 years ago. Quixotic plans to build some shaft to haul the ore out never seemed likely or practicable.

Their other mine is marginal and frankly, seems a bit of an ecological disaster given they just pump the waste off an undersea cliff. Not that there's anybody to complain to out there. Remoteness and cost keep SBM from offloading it.

I remember doing a comparison of EVN and SBM a few years ago and found coincidentally, nearly all the metrics lined up at 3x including SOI meaning SBM and EVN's SP should have been about the same in dollar value. Annoyingly, SBM went up to $5.50 or something while EVN languished at $3.30 (IIRC) but reality has asserted itself finally and while EVN went on to acquire more mines with good life and AISC, SBM just doubled down on it's one pit. Now I would say SBM should traded at maybe 80% of EVN's price or lower if they can't secure the looming future.

SBM have been accumulating a cash position but I think everyone agrees that's needed to buy a new mine however the timing couldn't be worse with gold hitting new highs. There's talk of the USA but who knows? I think they've left it too long and they shouldn't have been handing out dividends when money was required to secure the future.

Bob Vassie isn't infallible. He sits on the boards of other companies, some of them not doing well at all. Don't fall in love with a stock and always be leery about a company's story when compared to facts.