If one was to refer back to Diamond Fields discovery of Voisey's Bay and surrounding area plays at the time, it is readily apparent that the owners of adjoining and proximal claims did not so much as have to even locate a drill to benefit from the synergy created in share price by the find.

Consider MacDonald Mines for example and their near 2000% increase in share price during 1996: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BMK/charts?countryCode=CA&submitted=true&intflavor=advanced&origurl=%2Ftools%2Fquotes%2Fintchart.asp&time=20&freq=1&comp=Enter%20Symbol(s)%3A&compidx=aaaaa~0&compind=aaaaa~0&uf=7168&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&type=2&size=2&optstyle=1013

With regard to Fancamp, I suspect that to a certain extent the risks inherent with drilling deep on the Fancamp property and not finding anything may quite possibly outweigh any incremental gains in share value which would be realized should an extension of Eagle 1b or c be located under Fancamp property.

Should Peter drill and find a dud, Fancamp's share value would become dead weight - whereas if Peter (continues to) sit(s) on his hand, the splash effect of Noront's progress would and will be the catylyst for continued appreciation in Fancamp share value .

The questions then become: (a) which strategy best unlocks shareholder value for Peter's shareholders, and (b) could either strategy put the Board of Directors in breach of their fudiciary duties for corporate governance. So long as both strategies are defensible in terms of unlocking shareholder value and corporate governance, one could realistically expect for a management to put their own personal interests ahead of those of common shareholders.

I for one would love to see Peter bury a deep one on the border, as there seems to be real prospect for a potential discovery to be located in this area - this however seems unlikely, and I suspect there is a stronger likelihood he will instead continue to keep his hands warm at least for so long as his shareholders permit him to do so