i may be wrong, but does not look good, page-4

morning,

I think you will find that if they have readings coming from the nugget effect - very course gold - then early release of that information would only be misleading. I would say that this would be one of the reasons for withholding until you can get some clarity into the picture.

We know there is visible gold on the surface - lots of it. And probably over a large area - even possibly/probably where it ducks under the salt.

So, I don't know how you handle that responsibly. If you research 'difficulty nuggety gold' and similar terms - you get a drift of the problem.

You can get some amazingly high numbers in some sections of a core with rough gold - hundreds of grams per ton - probably thousands - but it doesn't tell you much with any accuracy.

Basically even with fantastic numbers on the surface - you might be looking at surface concentration and bugger all underneath or you could be standing right on top of a massive bull elephant.

So what would you tell your shareholders? Remember we already know from 100kg grab samples that we have about 50gms/ton (from memory) - over a large area and almost surely down at least a couple of meters and probably more like 15m - we know that, and that's quite a bit of gold in it's own right. And it gets worse if you are down more than many metres.

My gut has told me for a while, in fact a long while that there is going to be something big here - but, that might just be wishful thinking.

That's why even though I also am inpatient - I actually think this perceived delay is nothing but good news. Whether fml should have stopped our time expectations or whether they could have or should have told us something is one thing - but this much longer time than we thought things should take only leaves me with one conclusion - we have got something - if the holes were duds - we would be out and gone imo.


have a great day

Pinto