Some food for thought over the weekend, page-16

It's not meaningless. it took up a whole $200k difference.

But it took a LOT to get you to adjust it as it is misleading to include it in a dollar valuation. You did so very reluctantly indeed and in the process showed yourself extremely sensitive to criticism.

But is the chart alone meaningful? How about looking at the success rate of small cap exploration stocks in general?

Then working out statistically how reasonable your demands are that the SP must be up there, without ignoring the fact that this is a high risk high reward sector.

If you're only looking at charts, I guess you have no space to look at AZS discoveries then?

Even if you go back to 2003 (as requested by @Parks) I think you'll find many of the peers have ceased to exist, let alone not made discoveries.

Still this constantly harping strategy must we working for you. I recall @Mossberg was on a similar mission. He was all out supposedly to make the company accountable and conduct strikes against the Directors. Until that mission mysteriously disappeared without a trace. After the SP took a dive with the constant daily attacks.

I ask again: is this reasonable and proportionate discussion for an intrinsically volatile, high risk/high reward sector?
I'm not sure that posts such as you have recently made show real concern for the retail investor, who like anyone, has made risk vs reward assessments.
Calling for blood is a bit rich. This isn't BHP and you take your calculated chances in this sector.