I know this is only 3 assays for TNO, but they have come back very slightly above expectation IMO (based on the bubble chart in the ann which suggests 2.09% ave conc grade from previous assays). So it appears they are very representative of what is expected.
The average per metre of assay for TNO
Head grade = 0.7045%
Mass recovery = 29.2100%
V2O5 in Conc = 2.1345%
Compared to PUR (which I realise is much cheaper than TNO, so I'm not saying that is overvalued in comparison)
Head grade = 0.3497%
Mass recovery = 3.6661%
V2O5 in Conc = 1.7900%
*I have taken the full mineralised intersections and averaged/weighted them out per metre of assay. Also PUR used a cutoff, so likely the mass recovery would rise and concentrate grade drop should this be lowered to 0%, I don't think it is reasonable to assume that they can just target the higher grade intersections from within the magnetite intersection.
It is amazing what some eye grabbing coloured boxes can do to sentiment!
I assume if you have twice the head grade, 8x the recovery and a better overall concentrate then you are in a much better position (hence the market cap difference between the 2). All other things being equal, this would likely result in PUR having to process 19.1438x the amount of material to get the same amount of V2O5 in contained concentrate as TNO (allowing for higher V2O5 average in concentrate). This isn't allowing for strip ratios, which could multiply this number out quickly.
