Ann: Gold Mineralisation Intersected - Eidsvold Project, page-38

Look - its already been pointed out to you that lack of past success is no indicator of future potential, and that Newcrest would have been using differing targeting strategies, at different commodity prices and had their own agendas/options and budgets that they had to work with at the time. Already been spelled out for you that in exploration its common for thin sub-economic drill intercepts are often found at the margins of larger mineralized systems. You appear hung up on the fact that a "discovery hole" of suitable grade and width hasn't been found in the Eidsvold exploration area yet so you project this lack of "success" for eternity into the future. In order to do that you have to have the unique ability to sense the lack gold mineralization and the location of it before the area is tested at surface and then at depth by drilling. I suspect if you had this ability you wouldn't be sitting around sniping on HotCopper at one of the hundreds of early stage exploration companies on the ASX.

You have also demonstrated that you are ignorant about geophysics, as well as mineral exploration, and appear unaware of the methods used in an early-stages exploration company in your sweeping generalizations. So I really question why you are here and what possible "expertise" or special insights you could offer to other holders whom have done their research and hold MBK, or are possibly considering holding MBK in the future.

Given your track record in stock selection with SVL, CTL and MNM - I reckon you could be spending much more time evaluating your own stock selection methods and less time to worrying about saving us from the risk that MBK presents, after all, we are grown ups and have done the research, and accepted the risk by holding MBK. We know its early stage exploration with its attendant risk and rewards, its you who can't seem to grasp that.