Mucker,

thank you for the response to my posting and there is no need to apologise for your "practical background". As I said, good to have people with mining experience on this board.

1. Unfortunately you didn´t answer my question regarding Nickel grades:

It would be nice if you could give some more examples that support your statement of grades around 2.0% Ni "NOT being considered higher grades" and "suspended projects with much higher grades than 2.0%" .

I understand that you were refering to head grades, which, as far as my limited knowledge goes, are usually lower than in-situ grades, because this would be the concentration of the milled ore and not of everything what is in the ground (mixed mineralized and non-mineralized material).

But my comparison was apples to apples, because we don´t know Eagle 1 head grades yet, do we ?

So I compared in-situ to in-situ. And let me pick just one example from my list:

Onaping-Craig, Sudbury: 1,55% Nickel (23,5 Mt)

If this is in-situ and not head grade of one of the bigger Sudbury deposits than Noront´s Eagle 1A grade (also in-situ: 2.12% Ni) compares very favourably, doesn´t it ?

2. You made the following statement:

"If a mining company spends 750 million to develop a mine down to 3000ft (mines still operate in imperial measure), the first area that comes into production is the highest grade sections because they have to pay 100s of millions in bills. Over time ,the lower grade sections might be bypassed because they cant be mined at a profit. All ore reserves listed today, might not be classified as ore in the future."

I can´t see the relevance here, because surely Eagle 1A will be mined first, wouldn´t it ?

It´s the open-pit section (starting from 7 metres below surface) and has "high-grade" (yes, in-situ and not head grade).

After that the rest will be mined underground. For such an example, see the Kemi mine in Finland.

3. You stated:

"Secondly, lets not forget where we have invested. The mining exploration business is made up of the ultimate gamblers and promoters".

I can´t see a reason why you connect Noront to gamblers and promoters ?

Is there any fact to back up your statement ?

Again, I would like to hear these facts, because I find it very strange to turn up on this board and make some bold statements without delivering facts and not answering specific questions.

So, again:

1. Can you provide some examples of actual mine and/or deposit Nickel grades (head grades if you wish) to support your bold statement that 2.0% Nickel "are NOT being considered higher grades" and that there are "suspended projects with much higher grades than 2.0%" out there anywhere ?

2. What are the facts to support your view that Noront is in the "gambling and promotion business" ?

Because if you are what you say you are, it should be easy to come up with these "facts".

FANTOMAS

P.S.: You introduced yourself to this board with this statement:

"The key for this area is the amount of precious metals associated with the nickel or the chromite."

It would be nice to hear a comment from yourself as a mining expert to my post on by-products (especially stand-alone PGE mine with Eagle 1A), because this is - in my view - the answer to your statement :

We have enough precious metals to mine this deposit even without the Nickel !

http://agoracom.com/ir/Noront/forums/discussion/topics/359147-weighing-in-on-potential-size-of-a-snowman-those-who-want-facts-read-nr-s/messages/1203038#message

And let´s throw in the Chromite and Vanadium later on as well.

Looking forward to your response !