happy with company communication to holders?, page-150

Plonko now now we were having so much fun,

Your truly are funny so you couldn't come up with anything better so you picked on a slight wording mistake results instead of samples. The funny thing is you know exactly what I meant but that’s fine. You still accused PDY of not having samples or at least there not being any at the labs...whatever.

"And now (and for who knows how many times) you're telling me that the big boys such as BHP/RIO etc. get priority."

Yes they do that is common practice. The big boys use their own labs to do testing and then send core samples to independents for confirmation and proof for announcement purposes otherwise there could be a conflict of interest. No I do not think they all use the same labs I do believe they all use multiple labs but do you truly believe there are only to medium to large miners in WA...hence why I said "BHP/RIO etc"

Quite a few mining companies use onsite labs, and I would imagine BHP, RIO etc. would have onsite analysis, therefore if that was the case, would not impact on PDYs sampling schedule.

Actually yes but all results have to be verified by independents I thought you worked in the mining industry hmmmmm.

For example one of the companies used is Bureau Veritas and they are used by BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Codelco, Vale, Xstrata etc etc. BHP uses them in Escondida Chile, South Africe and WA that I know of, but I am positive as it was year and half ago that they use other labs also.

"where/when did (I) use the word devastating???"

I never said you called it devastating, but if it is factually correct and has made you a man so pro PDY lose faith then it has to be devastating…I called it devastating…but am still waiting on you providing this research. I at least quoted news releases, interview communications and results when I answered you.

But I bet Les thanks you, D, Mov for your support.

Have fun all

Kind Regards
Bobby