My point is that Packrat has probably not looked at any data and not done any sums, I suspect he has pulled a number out of thin air. But perhaps he has done the work and if so I'd like to hear how he gets to a valuation of $1.75. He quotes Macquarie who I believe have a valuation quite a bit higher and I'm convinced they will have looked at plenty of data and done lots of sums
Never the less, answer the question.