Could someone please let me know where on what conference call nr or pre bfs discussions, we talked or Elmer talked about giving a conservative BFS or any single post of a conversation where this was mentioned, I don't believe this to be true but multiple people stating it now as fact.

You see this is where talking to managmement one on one has tremendous value in doing your DD. At the convention I asked Elmer why we couldn`t make the BFS more "attractive" and this is what he told me: First off, all the directors want to get this done asap as I imagine all of us retail do as well. They could certainly drill alot more if they wanted to and add much more substantial value to the BFS. However, this would take another year plus more dilution to raise the funds to do it.

And secondly, Elmer wanted to produce an "air tight" BFS with the most conservative numbers to past the minimal requirements. This was done so that Teck doesn`t come back to us to "dispute our numbers" as too high and disqualify our BFS on those grounds (which has happened with other juniors by the way). So far so good as Teck`s approval of the public NR on Dec 21 indicates they have no problem with our numbers used. I should add that Teck is not stupid. They already have their own numbers they will use to determine a more realistic BFS and a value for SC.

So no these facts were not mentioned on any NR or conference call. They are not required to report these things so no mention of them. You only get the inside scoop when you talk with management and ask the right questions so people that leave out this important area of DD are cutting off their nose to spite their face (pardon the pun). Anyways, I think I shared enough juice so someone else who is not lazy can call up Elmer to get the rest. Ok enough said.