With all the posts and all the words used to discuss the warrant issue, I thought this post of yours was excellent, and a big part of that was its brevity!

As to the accuracy of it, that's up in the air - it could also be that the company wanted to get rid of the overhang of the warrants asap, and, indeed, would rather fewer, than more, of the warrants get exercised.

As to your last comment:

"I expect the company to ensure the warrant holders comfort this week."

Boy, I hope you're right!

All the arguments forwarded in the last few days have been generally really well-written, well-intentioned and well-thought out. Except for the two points below, I can't really say anything that hasn't been said, and we'll all have to wait to see what events of the next couple of weeks support which theories.

1. In their analysis, I don't think enough (any) emphasis is being placed by posters on the fact that once exercised, the shares are restricted for a couple of months. Big issue to me.

2. I want to see those warrants exercised, because it will mean that notwithstanding the trade restriction, those warrant holders (who I do believe had and have superior knowledge to most of us average bears), think the results of the current activities (drilling/assaying) are going to be positive.