Whether it's a full feasibility study or not is irrelevant imo....

Whether it's a full feasibility study or not is irrelevant imo. It's the possible intent and how it is perceived by the wider audience that is a concern. Of course, the astute person can put in whatever price they believe is reasonable to do their own sums but that is not the point. Often you will find when a business is overly bullish in certain areas of a study, they will also underestimate/under quote CAPEX/OPEX too. It's a flow on effect of trying to make project look the best it possibly can. Now I'm not saying that is happening here as we don't have enough information to determine if that is the case, but it's certainly something that happens so it's worth being aware of. Big business/lenders/ potential off-takers/potential investors and the greater market see straight through these things.

Tin price is already quite high historically, the tin price used is in the study is nearly the highest figure its been in the last 3 years. So to expect a 10-15% discount factor on expected prices is not unreasonable imo. You can't build in a price you 'hope' to get. Assumptions are dangerous and commodity prices have many factors that control them. I'm not here because I think Tin prices will be 50% higher than they are now, I'm here because the price is already respectable and shouldn't have too much downside, but that's not a given either.

We also need to remember that tin is the lowest metal content value in our deposit, so if anything, the price of tungsten and copper is just as, if not more important for us. Both also have a positive LT outlook with potential further upside room to move, which is good for us. If they lock in 10mt + in the next drill campaign, the numbers will do the talking themselves in the end and they won't need to spruce it up a bit.

Sure, I see some merit in this post. There are possibilities and opportunities that may or may not present themselves. Again, a lot of hope is built in to this situation so it's speculative at best at this point in time, but worthy of discussion. Firstly, we need to somehow pick our SP up off the floor to be taken seriously by any major players and to give us some bargaining power imo, seldom do you see someone rushing in and throwing large amounts of cash at a sub <5m cap company. It makes for a tough negotiation point on our behalf and we can't keep assuming the market just hasn't caught on, or it will catch on eventually. There's enough information out there to be analysed and judged accordingly and nothing NAE has done so far is getting us off the floor. When the market speaks I try to listen and find out what it's telling me, there's always greater forces in play. SML's SP isn't looking too crash hot either, so make of that what you will but a picture seems to be unfolding and both markets aren't buying it at the moment.

I'm also not so keen on comparing to the Lithium world as the commodity market for how Lithium it is bought and traded does not work the same as traditional base and precious metals (i.e exchanges), it's a different beast all together which is why many companies are going straight to the suppliers (i.e producers) to lock in their supply. But I do get that if the shortage becomes severe, business will go looking to lock in supply in any way they can. Tin LME levels are on an upwards trajectory at the moment, but again, all is not always as it seems in commodities.

I'd be lying if I said NAE wasn't disappointing me. It's hard to hide. Opportunity cost has been rather large here, and my confidence in both the 'market catching on' and Gary turning it around is diminishing the longer this goes on, which is why I am digger deeper, albeit probably too late in the piece. Would love to be proven wrong though.