Yes- I have to agree this IR response is rather unsatisfactory. It certainly does't answer questions other then to blame the inability to move foreward on the low POC. As VP's research has demonstrated- this has not been an impediment for many other companies and, as such, is not a valid explanation. It is also somewhat confusing that it speaks of an "operating partner". Now,  I understand that the idea is to seek a drilling partner who would then see that successful drilling as a prelude to mining operations. However, right now we are far from completing the exploration phase- the acheivement of which needs to be our immediate objective. What we now need is what would be first an exploration partner- who might then also become an "operating" partner.

I know there has been valid criticism of those who clammer for important but perhaps not quite material information- that it is desired simply to "feel good". But the situation is now different. Previously, under JB's leadership, the company moved forward with many intensive scienitific efforts- geological, geochemical, biogeochemical, historical and electrosensory- including ZTEM- all to carefully outline the prospective HM deposits. In addition, all the permitting activities were completed- the necessary archeological and environmental studies, for example- bringing us to the point of being ready for drilling. It is true that funding for drilling was not secured to complete that last crucial step- but that was supposed to be where the new BOD regime was to come in- to achieve that crucial deal- and this was even before the trade wars abruptly dropped the POC which is now being blamed for the impass. 

No- we have been stymied- and we are left without an explanation as to why. And rather than a path foreward- we are now being told to sit tight. Unfortunately- the new board members and management have not proven to be "rainmakers". Instead we have had a drought. Is new ZTEM reanalysis our salvation? Unlikely. Have we been told by a specific potential partner that such a reanalysis was needed- after which a deal will materialize? If true, it would be great- but again- unlikely. It's all just too mysterious and inexplicable. We, as shareholders, require more information- not simply to "feel good" but to understand better where OUR company stands and to have a voice in determining its direction- which needs to be towards early drilling.