I am not an incurable optimist. I want to be realistic. I have...

I am not an incurable optimist. I want to be realistic. I have made and lost money on gold stocks. The difference between a scoping study and a PFS is mostly in the amount of inferred oz's one can use. Rather than considering something negative with the change could one think in terms of the advantage of changing to a scoping study? Maybe after starting the PFS the idea of including a larger sweep of ore bodies including the new discovery at Lindsay's (still mostly inferred) was more advantageous. This could have been influenced by Franks illness with a view to a sale/JV, capital preservation and providing a more 'over view' perspective. The people who are making the decisions on out behalf have a lot of 'skin in the game'. I have experience in being disappointed with feasibility study results and pleasantly surprised. The same with drilling results. I have seldom experienced the fear around this co that in my opinion flies in the face of some hard evidence which is available to those who dig. I am not aware of any other co which has come to the market to anounce small changes to keep stock holders reassured. I am not as disappointed over the reporting as others. Its the timidity of stockholders that is now disapointing me. Sorry if I sound judgemental.