Good evening everyone.
I haven't posted in a long time, but have read the board faithfully every day. I don't feel the need to post my every thought, even though my mind may be racing with what I think is really good stuff. I usually find that if it really is good stuff, someone else more worthy and respected ends up posting my thoughts, so if he/she is right, I feel good about myself, and if he/she is wrong, well, at least I haven't embarrassed myself :)

Just a few thoughts I'd like to share tonight. First of all, I have never seen so much speculation and "blue sky" enthusiasm as in the last few weeks. It does not surprise me that some are disappointed with today's news release. But it really is not all that bad. In fact it is very good, in my opinion. Not "spectacular", but very very good. Mind you, 23m of massives in a hole where massives were not even targeted is definitely attention-grabbing. I believe the analyst on BNN said he would be pleased with a couple of 5m intervals.

What we all need to do is really read the news releases. Really read them. Compare numbers. Those who have done that this evening will see that the overall tenor of the mineralization in Eagle 1C is not far off from that in Eagle 1A (see 43-101). Both calculate out to somewhere is the range of ~3% Ni equivalent. Eagle 1B is considerably lower, at ~1.6% Ni equivalent. But after all, it is just one hole so far. Hole #1 back in August 2007 was about the same caliber.
What is very encouraging is what somebody else posted earlier this evening. These two zones in Hole 49 represent the two longest intercepts we have ever had.

Perhaps someone could help me with this one. The 178.84 meters of mineralization is contiguous with another 37.47 meters right above it. This first section was reported separately as 1.77m of massives from 269.21m to 270.98m, and 35.70m of disseminated sulphides from 270.98m to 306.68m. Starting from there the "main" zone is reported as 178.84m of 1.19% Ni, etc. Why on earth would they report it this way? It makes no sense to me. 216.31m of mineralization sounds way better! The overall grade would only drop from 1.19% Ni to 1.10%. Any explanations? Is this spin? Just a little confused here.

Now for a genuine concern. Like many of you, I try to do a little due diligence before buying any security. The over-exuberance, the rumors, the over-the-top adjectives ("spectacular", "phenomenal", "amazing", etc.) get my blood pressure up just like anyone else, but I just can't bring myself to put my money on them. I work hard for it. I would like to to think I can count on the facts as presented by my company. I bought more NOT recently based largely on one fact. Like many of you serious investors, I was impressed by the length of the mineralization in Hole 49, but was more interested in getting some indication of a second dimension to round out the picture. I thought I had it in Hole 45. The June 29 NR states:

"Hole NOT-08-045 at Eagle One, deepened in 2009, intersected 46.12 metres of nickel, copper sulphides including two short intervals of high-grade massive sulphides."

It goes on to repeat the same data later on in the NR. Fast forward to the NR of today, August 5. The interval reported is not 46.12 meters. It is 14.62 meters. Furthermore, only one very short interval of massive sulphide is reported. Does this concern anyone else out there? How can 46.12 meters suddently become only 14.62 meters. Less than a third. If it is just a transpositional error, it is UNACCEPTABLE, especially considering that we retail investors hang our hats on these scraps of information, whereas others are likely privy to a lot more. If there is more mineralization, where is it? I must say, looking at the geographic models posted on the website this evening, the interval in hole 45 looks like it might be longer, but it is hidden behind the delineation lines for hole 49, so it is very difficult to discern. I don't mean to be overly meticulous, but it seems to me that this is a key piece of data that they did not diligently and properly communicate to us. I reread the June 29 release at least a dozen times. Did not anyone in the office reread it at least once?

That aside, I am still holding. Its been 16 years since I first bought a few, and I've not yet sold a single share. Despite the many disappointments over the last couple of years, I've continued to buy here and there. Keep the faith, friends. Higher valuations are coming, probably not tomorrow, maybe not next week or month. But the value is there in the ground, no doubt about it.