low grade , page-6

Bear23 sorry to have caught you in my general brushstroke of querying why some posters want to label the results from Bolivia as "low grade".
If you have not inferred that then I'm pleased.

So far as your accusation of "assumptions". In a sense my comments about the workforce situation could be deemd to be "assumptions" or "deductions" or "conclusions".
It seemed reasonable to consider that if RAU has the support of the workforce (through offering better pay,conditions, full time work, training, etc) then it has a loyal team behind it and is not going to face the conflict and difficulties that some mining companies have experienced in parts of Bolivia. I used the term "issues" in that sense. I did not mean that there may not from time to time be the odd item to be worked through and resolved but the conditions at this stage are pretty conducive to some smooth sailing.

If you are so desperate to know who the consultants are, and as you say you deal with mining comapnies all the time, why don't you ring the RAU office and request the unformation.
I have a little more faith in the integrity of RAU and its wish to deal with reputable agencies than obviously you do.

So far as the financier is concerned. I think I answered about that last time. The reason to announce could simply be to advise shareholders that preparation work is well under way and the wheels have been set in motion so the project can quickly get going once the necessary preparation is done.

Why has Vista given over Amayapampa. I posted an item from Vista some weeks ago. Basically their reasoning is that they wanted to concentrate on their Mexican venture and on Mt Todd in NT. They have wanted to offload that for some time (e.g. Luzon). They will, of course still do well from it if RAU goes ahead with it - see the details of the agreement between RAU and Vista.