I'm no expert, just opinionated.  Thanks for the props, we get yakking over in the Village because many of us have been following this play for the better part of a decade.  Never thought we'd be where we are today with not only such uncertainty, but such pathetic market caps.

The problem I see in Nevada is the big capital costs, questionable overburdens, and total contained minerals doesn't really imply value in the absence of a viable path to production being executed.  There are lots of properties with huge resources that are for various reasons almost worthless.  So I haven't yet seen anything in Nevada that turns my crank (which seems to have been shared by the collective yawn following the PEA) - but on the other hand I am not saying it is or isn't great - may well be either, but personally nothing compares to the upside I believe exists in Mongolia.  Listen, a jackpot in Nevada would make me happily tell the world I couldn't have been more wrong.

You can judge the political situation in Mongolia.  I'm frustrated with the instability and rhetoric thrown around in their politics.  On the other hand bark can often be worse than bite, and their pragmatic economic interests are aligned with success for companies like both TRQ and ETG.  The OT egg is already scrambled with ETG - the key JV licenses legally belong to ETG.  There have not been any laws passed to date that have been tested against the agreement contained in the IA or threatened the ownership of the key licenses.  The IA promises that any new law will not negatively affect the promises made in that agreement.  There has been talk of that, but no action has gone that far.

Constitutionally speaking, a legislature in any country cannot bind it's successor's ability to legislate - so a law saying"this law may never be changed by the Parliament passing it now" is non-sensical.  It can be changed.  However, the legal and economic value of the promise made on behalf of one nation remains and may be enforceable outside of the country, or challenged and struck down within, or be the subject of economic damages for breach of the original promise - ie. sue them and wait for assets outside, or press the current government to make good.

If Mongolia wants to be the new iteration of Albania or North Korea, we have a major problem.  But I don't believe that is the case, and an enormous amount of pressure can be brought to bear to force them to meet their international obligations - in financial markets, in import/export, in oil, power supplies, transportation connections and open borders ...

Risks, yes, runaway state, no.

Just my views.