You asked:

Question number 2 that perhaps somebody can educate me on. Perhaps I misunderstood reading through some of the history of the company, but in the past didn't drill results indicate not much but only until the bulk sampling were real values realized?

1. Past drill results did indicate a lot !

They confirmed mineralzation down to 300m at Timmins (still open at depth).

And the drill results back in 2008 were not bad at all, have a look at my previous posting:

Result highlights include:

6 meters 4.35 g/t Au average

8 meters 3.48 g/t Au average

4 meters of 3.42 g/t Au average

4 meters of 2.317 g/t Au average

2 meter of 2.26 g/t Au average

http://agoracom.com/ir/GoldenHope/forums/discussion/topics/423572-potential/messages/1389901#message

So drilling is neccessary and was quite successful in the past.

The only point why we do bulk samples is because of the "nugget effect", which is underestimating the drill results, meaning drill results will show lower gold grades compared to bulk sampling, because the small core will miss a lot of the gold (if you don´t hit a nugget).

And of course, drilling is needed to see what is at depth, because you can´t do bulk sampling at 500m (unless you have a ramp and a shaft for underground bulk sampling).

Your second part of the question:

If this is the case, why are , we so excited about drill results, shouldn't we be more pressing towards doing some grab samples from the various areas?

We will be exited about the drill results (especially those with visible gold), because they will confirm continuity of gold mineralization at depth, which is needed to confirm tonnage potential !

So how would you confirm tonnage with grab samples ?

Conclusion: we need DRILLING (ideally to 1000m for confirming Tilsley´s theory) for TONNAGE and BULK SAMPLING for GRADE !

FANTOMAS