With all due respect, if the grades from bulk sampling were within a range of what could be considered "economic", don't you think that NOT would have continued spending $$ on developing the project???

If the indicated grades were considered "un or sub-economic", as was implied by NOT, who really cares "how" low were they??? What logical conclusions would you have drawn from their actions or lack of action???

Enough of this Windfall conspiracy theory....let it rest. Lets focus on the highest priority projects............in the ROF!!!

Respectfully submitted

geoprof