question for spector

Spector you say:

"thought the presentation was very good.... until I got to the part about Bolivia where they basically said "In another part of Bolivia they found heaps of gold so that's shows how good Bolivia is".

This is just irrelevant spin that has little to do with the area that RAU have in Bolivia. They might as well have said "we're really excited about Northcote because in another part of Australia they found heaps of gold" - so why say it?"

Imho you are completely mixing your illustrations.

First, the quote you refer to is in the section on Bolivian Potential NOT the Amayapampa section. So, YES they are saying that they see the mineral potential of BOLIVIA as outstanding. I would have thought the existence of world class mines JUST MIGHT suggest that potential.

Second, you then suggest they may as well say they're excited about Northcote because in another part of Australia....etc. They were NOT trying to say Amayapamba was good or excellent based on the presence of World Class mines elsewhere. That imo is not the point they were making.

You slam the report as spin. If this was the case why did it DOWNPLAY LIPICHI GRADES???

Look at the example given:

Lipichi - "...intersections such as

73m @ 4.2 g/t,
44m @ 5.5 g/t,
23m @ 3.2 g/t &
53m @ 5.3 g/t; plus silver, copper and antimony.

A good example of the potential of Bolivia."


BUT WHAT ABOUT THESE:

IntersectionS

8 metres @ 26.3 g/t Au
2 metres @ 22.9 g/t Au
16 metres @ 15.6 g/t Au
8 metres @ 10.0 g/t Au
1 metres @ 7.8 g/t Au
52 metres @ 6.4 g/t Au

Now, if I was a spin doctor and wanted to make real mileage out of my example - I WOULD PUT THOSE IN.

My point? You mix illustrations. You take a point about Mineral Potential and seem to link it to Amayapampa via a Northcote/Australia illustration. You don't know enough about results from Lipichi to pick up that he is DOWNPLAYING IT in his use as an illustration.

I said NOTHING yesterday. I was and am sick of the rubbish.
At the end of the day I am no more in touch with the company that any one else who cares to read the reports carefully and do their research.

I find it objectionable when statements like yours are made that imo twist the intention of the information.

So....after all that...My question:

Was the quote you grabbed illustrating MINERAL POTENTIAL IN BOLIVIA, or the POTENTIAL OF AMAYAPAMPA?