"Why not make the comparison? They're both related in that people think ZTEM matters for share price."
It may matter in both cases - not because it is a ZTEM Survey Per Se (assuming promising ZTEM Survey results) but because the "Ecosphere" (for lack of a better term) CONTEXTS are totally different, and COULD give rise to different outcomes.
Put another way: Is everything other than a future ZTEM result the same in the Here and Now as it was in the There and Then? I don't think it is a valid comparison for assessing the impact of a favorable survey (should one eventuate).
Pebble differs from AZ in that Briscoe staked an enormous area while NAK was leading the way into a storm of UNKNOWNS, the nature and impact of which could not be more than guessed as outlier possibilities at the time of the Claiming or initial exploration.
I would assume only ONE Major complete unknown in AZ - Grade/Area/Depth/Cover - the rest, based on past activity, culture, terrain, wildlife, etc., ought to be fairly reliably assessed. So too Knee-Jerk EPA interference with little or no justification, adverse precedent, etc.
If the Market knows all, it would surely perceive differences between the two 'situations'. . . . With Alaska evolving to some future end state of viability or lack of.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
