Have to say that some of the assumptions being made by...

Have to say that some of the assumptions being made by proponents for and against the placement are starting to test the bounds of credibility.

To be fair, seeing as I have been trying to get the against side into the realms of reasonable arguments by pointing out some realities with the spiriting away of gold and hedging issues some had, perhaps it is time to do the same with the positive side.

Will pick one positive assumption topic and float that around the room.

The Barrick Granny Smith Mill and what could be done with that has been mentioned in several posts with the assumption being made that it is up for grabs with not the slightest bit of evidence being offered that this is the case.

Going on what is out there in the public domain, it could be well argued that there is a contrary viewpoint to that assumption based on:

a. Barrick has increased their own production through the mill over the last two quarters (see the Barrick quarterly reports for March and June 2012),

b. Granny Smith mine had proven and probable reserves of 635,000oz as at December 2011 (Barrick web site),and

c. Swick Mining Services announced in March 2012 it had been given a one year drilling contract for the Granny Smith Mine (Swick web site).

Am well aware that there could be some life of mine issues associated with Granny Smith that could be driving the assumption the mill is up for grabs, however whatever the case, something needs to be but on the table so the veracity of the assumption can be judged.