Ann: Leonora Gold Project Update, page-137

1. 1. What exactly made the directors expect an increase in the pre-capital production costs? Presumably it wasn't just a vibe.
   2. What were the "key aspects" reviewed?
   3. Who conducted that review?
   4. So what was "the potential scope of the increase in capital costs"?
   5. Why would there also have to be equity raising to fund exploration and corporate costs?
   6. What "key parameters" does the board lack confidence in, in addition to time estimates, cost estimates, and funding?
   7. How did the discovery that some capital costs would be higher than estimated lead to lack of confidence in time estimates, cost estimates, funding path, and unspecified key parameters?
   8. How does it make sense to implement an actual delay to allow estimates of possible delays?
   9. Why is it necessary to have anindependentreview? Independent from what, exactly?
   10. If Como are the principal consultants, does that mean the plan is to bring in more consultants?
   11. Could the board actually provide updates regularly rather than just "seek to provide" them "in the coming weeks".
   12. How does the board know that what they have done will result in better shareholder value than continuing with the project? How does that bit of confidence emerge from the lack of confidence and uncertainty expressed previously?
   13. Did the board factor in a halved SP when they decided that 11 million to fund a pause and possible loss of Sprott was better than just raising contingency funds at last week's SP without casting doubt on every aspect of the program except the tanks and foundations?
   14. How will the yet to be appointed MD exercise close oversight of an independent review? Isn't that a contradiction?
   15. Will the resumption of the development be "targeted" or "full"?

I accept that things can go wrong, and that trying to make a shedload of money, which was my aim in buying Kin, is risky. But I do expect communication in clear English that actually informs.