"I believe the first two question were already answered by Traci and Dr. Wilson"

Not sure that I can agree. I asked if the ore body wasn't already well localized from the ZTEM studies and whether that understanding was changed in the new report. Wilson's response was that it "documents detailed geological mapping and sampling in support of the existing targets" . It's not clear to me what "in support" means. Does that mean they might still be "adjusted"- and by whom?And while maybe it adds information- the question is whether it is useful information. SRK did not think more information was needed. So questions remain- was time and money expended wisely on this new report? Furthermore, the  question of the location and extent of the ore body as sufficiently defined by ZTEM was not directly addressed. And if there are new interpretations, do these new interpretations threaten the integrity of the original targets? 

"They probably can't answer most of the third question."

As for the new question- are there still other impediments to making a deal?- I think it can and should be answered. There  may be unrelated impediments- - notably- idoitic lawsuits for one. If and how BG is going about meeting with potential investors, for another.

So- I would say there is much yet to be answered.