The problem with your argument is it is all talk, no substance.
The problem with your assumption is that you presume that it is my argument. I only relay the concerns of colleagues that have forty-year careers riding on this outcome.
The "All talk, no substance" allegation is essentially what we have all listened to since 2008 from every tinfoil hat wearer from Greg McCoach to Doug Casey. Every single letter writer was wrong about the Yukon, about takeovers in the juniors, about everything related to the efficacy of owning juniors as a sectoral asset allocation.
I content that it is NOW that you should be buying SELECTED NON-PRECIOUS METALS mining shares because for every one silver name, you have thirty gold names and for one base metal name, you have fifty precious metal names. Scarcity value is a definite advantage.
The seniors in the base metals arena have much deeper pocket books and far better management teams than these ex-investment bankers all running the Senior Golds.
So all of Destinator's "talk" about the "Greatest Gold Find in Canadian History" has no "substance" because EXSFF is down 90% in eighteen months. All "talk", no "substance" - or is that what you were referring to, my dear Gregory?