Ann: BRR Webcast - Tanami Presentation , page-8

Charl, sorry for the delay in responding.

Thanks for your insight and your kind interest in my thoughts. I am pleased to contribute further if the forum considers it adds value.

I hear you on the share price and hope the market will revalue TAM as an explorer/producer.

I think that us punters understand the appeal of the shiny new rocks at ground rush, ripcord and SD etc. and the very proven and extensive nature of gold mineralisation on the NT side of the border, however the question I was really posing was what ABM would do if it ONLY had the WA tenements. Sorry I wasn't really clear about that. The comparisons to ABM are not meant to be a put down to TAM, it's just that when you are not spoilt for choice (like TAM) you tend to maximise the value of ALL of your assets (like ABM).

My suggestions of some focus on Bald Hill and the associated birds (osprey, sandpiper etc.) is simply that TAM has never generated a resource out of Bald Hill and my suggestion was that if ABM only had the ML's they would have generated one - a big tonnage/ low grade with a gravity recovery / heap leach model. I think also ABM would have wondered more about the source for Coyote and Bald Hill and conducted some up saddle deep drilling to look for a source rock (like buccaneer porphyry - yes I do know that others found this prior to them getting the tenements).

I am 100% on board with the focus on ground rush etc. and appreciate the management restructure issues - I guess I am just looking at fast cash and low hanging fruit. I love the "self funding big target exploration company" model and the next evolution which is the "dividend paying self funding big target exploration company"!

The Kavanagh info was good but maybe we need a bit more detail. Coyote is a freak but perhaps there are others out there and I am left wondering just how many other Coyote/Old Pirate style deposits are at surface in killi killi / stubbins formation on TAM's tenements.

I do think that TAM should take a small team, separate them out from the main game, and get them to look at all of the assets and determine the highest and best value while a core team focuses on GR and SD. A JV on the birds at Bald Hill or to drill out resources with some satellite tonnages need not distract the core team. Gold is hot right now and going to get hotter but how long will that last. Time to market is key. There are lots of Asian interest that do not want to invest as retail shareholder - they want some direct investment in the ground/plant and this could be a ready source of capital to generate operating cash for the company (quickly).

If the ore is amenable to heap leach, then it should be considered, particularly for small open cut low grade satellite tonnages (bald hill) where there is access to a central CIP facility (ie Coyote). The environmental issues can be readily managed in the remote areas in which TAM operates. Unlike large CIP operations and ball mills, heap leach infrastructure is typically easy to relocate once a resource is expended. $20-25M is realistic for a satellite heap leach operation that does not require a camp (use Coyote) or CIP plant (use Coyote and truck concentrated PLS) providing the ore is amenable (simple crush - no ball mill). Beyond bald hill, I suspect that TAM could generate 5 decent high priority targets for heap leach satellite tonnages. Offering those for joint venture would not add a single $ to debt and could be generating cash within 2 years.

I hope that better clarifies my thinking.