Let's forgo the lingo and assume these are the numbers. If this is the case how is this valuation even remotly acceptable as a method?

If they paid 262.5M for 13.5% of 14.2B lbs and we are comparing to 25% of 5.5B lbs we need to adjust for the massive difference in resource size.

$1.38/share * 5.5/14.2 = $0.534/share

Pretty big difference I would say. Why would Teck pay 19.4M/1% of 5.5B lbs when they got 1% of 14.2B lbs for 19.4M. 

Should be 7.51M/1% if we are using this same purchase and adjusting for resource size.

Now of course this is the "sandbagged" and not the district etc. but if we are talking available numbers which someone can actually see now vs the initial post, how can we not adjust for the resource size of these projects. One is almost 3x the size of the other. 

"

QBII lists only Copper and Moly.  Copper in Reserves of 14.2 B pounds (not sure how they can use the word reserves when there is no Feasibility study yet)

Schaft Creek lists Copper, Gold, Moly and Silver.  Copper Proven and Probable is 5.5 B pounds and we know this is based on only have the current 2012 RE.

"

"

$262.5 million USD for 13.5 percent.

$19.4 millin USD per 1 percent.

Assume same metric for SC, it'll be $486 million USD.  Multiply it by 1.25 exchange rate.

$607 million CDN divide by 440 million shares.  $1.38 per share

"