Ann: Presentation - Noosa Mining and Investor Conference, page-77

Nearlydun, you may have a point, but many of who have been in this company a while longer than you realise Peter's attributes lie in the substance of exploration and in fact that facilitates further development because it determines the primary asset base which is more important at this point in time because it becomes collateral. SPQ is waiting results to prove up its position. I am sure ears would have pricked up at the presentation had he had them to deliver. It is not that drills have been dusters, but indicate a massive system. Big money will not move until further proof is in.

Would an individual approach a bank manager for a loan not knowing their budgeted expenses or what they can use or collateral to borrow a larger amount for futher evelopment? I think not. Peter has done an outstanding job of managing finances in tough times, and the lights are on, with SPQ still drilling in what will be transformational for the company. Blind Freddy can envisage what they have got from the results to date. Best strategic managers should spend most of their time planning, and that includes contingencies, in a methodical way which Peter has done in spades, so that while initial phases might appear slow on multiple sub projects they are still scheduled along a ctitical path to come together quickly at the right time. SPQ has stated their goals and has met them one by one. There are many companies out there and we all get caught from time to time who over promise and under deliver. In the wash up , it is better to be sure than sorry. Check Peter's CV. I think his analitical ability and track record together with the other directors make for a strong negotiating team for when the pointy end of the business expansion in the next phase takes place.

At the moment marketing is not the issue, but building a foundation is the company goal for the long haul. Peter is well connected to progress SPQ in the next phase after results.

Traders have different goals and thier ownership is transient. I think the best way to measure the opportunity cost of trader's funds is to do a SWOT analysis. That is to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to see if the reward outweighs the risk or whether funds could be better used elsewhere. At least we know what we have got in management style. If it does not suit your trading style, the stock is not for you. Substance beats hope anyday and on balance, the strengths and opportunities far outweigh the weaknesses of marketing at an oral presentation or threats. That is, benefits outweigh the costs.

As Mode rightly said, the numbers won't go unnoticed by the big end of town who are desparite for future supply. We are piss ants compared to their market power as traders/investors. Got to follow the money and we are fortunate to be on ground floor before the big moves take place.