KKW, Like your reasoning.
Taking the reasoning a bit further though: If we remove reference to thin sand (from which the oil samples were taken) from the drilling update, would there have been any justification for calling a T/H? I think not. This suggests to me that the thin sands and oil samples occurred day (even perhaps weeks) earlier.
CN's reponse, if interpreting NAV's exact words, related to how the market will receive the news regarding thin sand and oil samples - nothing more. Remember, Nav made a side comment re the announcement that was due to come out - stating that he/she hopes that it will be positive news. CN then responded to say that she hopes it will be "terrific". In the context that it was said it seems that CN referred to the content of the announcement that was about to be released and that she "hopes" that the public/investors/market will perceive it as "terrific".
Well, everybody can decide for themselves how they wish to interpret the announcement. So-so, not-bad, great, fantastic, TERRIFIC. Peoples choice.
Of course one can dream and hope that CN, when responding to NAV, did not immediately catch on/absorb NAV's comment re the about-to-be-released-announcement and that she infact eluded to results that are already within her knowledge, not discloseable due to "tight hole policy, but which she knows will be released through announcement in due course.
So much for interpreting.
Searching for Sugarman............ Hmmm JohnnPaull....
FAR Price at posting:
5.1¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)