Roulston points out that the BFS base case does not support a mine on paper. That means we are stuck proving the case like it or not.

This is not about a development decision yet. This is about ownership 1st.

Teck can enhance the project all they want as long as they want, they already know they can, but 1st they must own it.

They already know they can enhance it, and I'll quote Roulston:

* Converting the inferred resource into ore could have a big impact on the project economics

* Improving recoveries (providing considerable scope for improvements - huge impact on profitability)

* Shortening the 5 year timeline (positively impact the project economics)

Roulston then says ''Teck will probably not want to lose this project'' And explains why:

* Enormous scope for outlining more resource

* Area of interest and surrounding claims (highly prospective for further resource)

* Teck presence in BC (Trail, Galore, Highlland valley)

Then Roulston says '' My sense is that the major will want to retain an interest''. But then explains that the 4 year clause is in the way so he says '' a simple solution would be for Teck to buyout Copper Fox''

We know everything above and Teck knows it. This is 1st about ownership. How much do we own. Teck will be put on the clock this week or next week and we'll find out.