I don't like to get caught in these sorts of debates and I'm a...

I don't like to get caught in these sorts of debates and I'm a supporter of both companies although I only hold STA. However whilst Thunderbird indeed has vastly superior head grade to Coburn, based on studies Thunderbird has a significantly higher capex - last I looked it was around $340 million vs $170 million. There's also no advantage on opex due to differences in scale. Higher NPV though, say double, and double or a bit more life.

How can it be that head grade advantage wouldn't necessarily flow through in Capex/Opex? Well head grade is generally king but it's about more than that - grain size, metallurgy, contaminants/slimes and extraction techniques needed etc. Simplistically, Coburn has to move more grains of sand overall to get their HMS out but with simpler cheaper methods, a smaller plant and lower geolocation related costs. Thunderbird plant could be rescaled though to make a difference there.

I'd like to see both get up but I think only one even might on this cycle. I have long expected that to be Thunderbird as I've discounted Coburn for years (sorry fellow STA holders) however time slippage is not kind for Thunderbird. I think we've got 2 years max left in this cycle and Thunderbird is a 2 year+ construction.