trading halt, page-31

Yep, for a management team that are typically so well disciplined and cautious, it was a peculiar and seemingly ham-fisted way of expressing things.

When a generic statement noting the company's pleasure at the judges findings would have been sufficient to let the SP run, it's puzzling why they threw into question the 'roadmap' from mineral exploration company to mining company, which they've been commending for so long (i.e. Riley Creek > Livingstone > Mt. Lindsay).

To be sure, they are a bunch of smart guys (which is one of the great advantages of this stock, in addition to the excellent tenements), so there's a good chance they have a solid reason for 'managing expectations', even though this seems like such a strange juncture to do so.

Perhaps they simply wanted to defer a congratulatory tone until the appeal period elapses?

Perhaps they wanted to progress the Livingstone and Mt. Lindsay permits/approvals process further before liberating the profits from the Riley Creek DSO? If that's the case, they need to be a bit more transparent with shareholders, to avoid repetitions of today's depressed SP showing.

Who knows? In any case, we shall find out sooner or later.

It probably wouldn't be a bad idea, Hamish & Co. (we know you're listening) if you could be a little more forthcoming, and a little less opaque. Otherwise, we may wrongly assume you're doing nothing, and therefore begin to resent the millions of dollars we throw your way every month to build shareholder value.