Thanks to pointing to that interesting info. Although I can...

Thanks to pointing to that interesting info.

Although I can agree with most of that, I don't think you could simplistically say that that approach is always the right approach but it often is.

I get what they are saying i.e. "Don't overpay for any asset", but that ignores the fact that sometimes its possible for a company to pick up a marginal project at a good price, and then have a spectacular unanticipated exploration success that instantly makes the project much more economic or even world class, I know some shareholders hate exploration expense, but it still is the best "bang for your buck" in value adding providing you are patient and successful.

Some companies have acquired projects when overall metal/market sentiment is very low and have been prepared to land bank/slowly build up development to catch the next commodity price upswing. This is counter-cyclic, and a matter of buying straw hats in winter, and is still a viable strategy in my opinion because you are doing exploration/development in the "bust" and have access to drill rigs and personnel rather than trying to explore or expand during a boom. Similarly - if money is cheap (low interest rates) then you may as well borrow to fund if your conviction is that the asset you are borrowing for will be profitable soon.

In some cases the seller of the asset is so distressed, or they have obviously missed their opportunity to make the asset profitable, or sometimes leave so much "easy pickings" that a canny acquisition at a reasonable price can become "company making". Putting together good deals and canny acquisitions is how some success stories have flourished e.g. EVN