nice clar out of gip, page-37

re: gip versus sgw - goldbars Selwyn,

The BFS is a Bankable Feasibility Study. As the name suggests it is a study to assess the feasibility of the project. "Bankable" is a term used to describe a feasibility study that adheres to and meets a set of agreed standards and principlesfor the basis of the report - i.e. it does not rely on supposition or assumption, but rather on measurable data and results.

It is an independent assessment that will look at the total cost of establishing the project based on the known costs of the equipment needed, the cost of operating the mine, the plant and administration, and compare that to the known data about what is under the ground and what it is worth.

Having agreements to sell the Ta2o5, the Feldspar and the Tin, makes it a lot easier to justify the project as being economical, becasue there is less of a question mark over the company's ability to move product and what sort of price they can achieve.

You might see comments on these GIP threads about the estimated cost of production for GIP's Tantalum being only about 25% of the costs incurred by SGW. These numbers come from the initial scoping study (a far less rigid and dependable "feasibility study") and what we shareholders are looking for is confirmation of these sorts of numbers with the release of the BFS.

So, the BFS is looking to "prove" the company's hype about the value of the project. That the study is bankable means that it can be used as a proven asset against which the company might raise funds - ie security for a loan from a bank.

A neutral or bad BFS while not necessarily the end of GIP, will make it a lot harder for them to convince financiers, insto's and punters, to part with their cash to fund the project.

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Badfish