What you guys are not seeing, and maybe I am halucinating, is that he has tightened up the ellipsoid at Nic Lake. This REDUCES the ounces contained, but keeps the g/t high. This is setting us up for success in the Feasability / PEA as the economics of the open pit at Ormbsy with additional ouces TRUCKED from Nic Lake must be economical on a g/t basis (from Nic Lake more than Ormsby, due to increased transportation costs associated with Nic Lake).

So it makes sense to keep the resource at Nic Lake at a high G/t cutoff and a tight ellipse. Look to the revised Ormsby zone resource to be at a lower cutoff, as it will be at the processing site.

Also, as I wrote in my "tidbits from Yellowkinfe" post, the larger drill I observed heading up the Winter Road in early Feb was indeed for Tyhee and has now been demobilized. It was used to drill DEEP, I believe at Ormbsy. The open pit at ormsby will be larger, including lower g/t so that access to depths below 200 m (all the way down to 600m if in part underground) will be the mine expansion plan.

So the next resource update will not feel as dissapointing as Nic Lake, and Nick Lake was actually done well, if my assessment of the economics being different for what we will transport from Nic Lake vs what we process at Ormsby is correct.

Yes, they are not doing a good job on PR, but YES, they are working well towards an economic plan that will be bankable, buildable, and profitable.

I am keenly interested to learn where the larger, deeper holes were drilled this winter, Big Sky or deep at Ormsby (to tie into the Discovery depths). I hope it was Ormsby, as demonstrating that there is gold at depth to 600M would be a tripler of the resource there, at minimum.

SKELEG