Ann: Antler Project Scoping Study - Investor Presentation, page-17

To be fair, Mike's guidance and slippage is much more reasonable than it used to be. This old thread made me chuckle thinking about his Sep'20 sales pitch on recommencing mining in the near term. Keeping up short term news flow and the carrot of production for all those divi's soon is part and parcel in the ASX game of keeping interest and the share price up for interminable rounds of CR's. Of course explorer/developer CEO's are salesman, and of course 'stretch targets' are going to slip.

Seriously though, sometimes the BS has to be called out. In what parallel universe was Mike going to compile enough reliable drilling, metallurgical, geotechnical data etc to support BFS and Mining Reserve capable of satisfying bankers required to lend on building a new mine inside two years? Forget about the multitude of permitting and environmental baselines/approvals for tailings, mine licencing, water access... the mind boggles. Even on a patented lease, ownership of the property and a plan to "Refurbish Underground Workings" and use "Existing Infrastructure" (headframe above dodgy shaft built for a few thousand tonnes a year below) that timeline was absurd. NWC isn;t a two-man band on some two-bit reality TV show prospecting operation.

A completely ignorant person might believe it, but ignorance is no excuse for selling it to the market with confidence. Mike isn;t ignorant though, he's done enough mine studies in North America across multiple companies to know the score. Here we are three years later and pretty much still at the start of a PFS and regional exploration drill target delineation lol. The good news is much of the slippage is behind us, even if there's inevitably more slippage to come. The share price has come way back from over-promised to under-delivered levels (across multiple aspects of the project). All of which provides a much better risk-reward entry level for those with the patience long mine-developments require.

Some people get really upset when I call BS on misleading or non-credible management communication. Bad luck, that's the role I chose to play on HC in 2006 and I'm happy to keep doing it. Here's an idea, don't BS in the first place, just let the reality of good projects talk for themselves and set investors achievable goals. Then again, like I said, the pressures to stay relevant and keep investors interested in the fierce competition for funds amongst a raft of other over-cooked stories is relentless...

Maybe in getting what they demand from their CEO's, investors get what they deserve? Maybe, don;t judge a man until you walked a mile in his shoes is appropriate...

GLTAH