page 127 sec 14.11

Pitard recommended, "Do not focus too much on the grade increase. However, you should most certainly focus your attention on the possible increase of the ore reserves. The difference can be quite potent for the project" and went on to report:

"The In Situ Nugget Effect

Results from the Heterogeneity Test help to roughly quantify the effect of diamond drilling diameter on the evaluation of the gold resources. Results are as follows:

A ½ PQ 2m core is 9 times too small to include a gold cluster where it should for a 0.5 g/t grade, 4 times too small for 1.1 g/t, and 2 times too small for 2.5 g/t.

A ½ HQ 2m core is 18 times too small to include a gold cluster where it should for a 0.5 g/t grade, 8 times too small for 1.1 g/t, and 3 times too small for 2.5 g/t.

A ½ NQ 2m core is 25 times too small to include a gold cluster where it should for a 0.5 g/t grade, 11 times too small for 1.1 g/t, and 5 times too small for 2.5 g/t.

These are only approximate numbers and you should look at them with circumspection. It is the general message that counts: Placer Dome had a much better chance to include gold clusters with the systematic use of a larger diameter.

However, it is very clear the diameter used by Placer Dome was already too small. Furthermore, when you drill, the smaller the diameter the less the recovery, and especially for the gold contained in crumbling clusters of sulfides/quartz which may occur at Las Cristinas. So, we are really looking at the tip of the iceberg with the present Heterogeneity Test: It is good news for the Crystallex management.

Unfortunately, nobody can make miracles by looking at only 49 samples, therefore it would be ludicrous to make any attempt at quantifying what I called "good news."