"Quantec surveys indicate the position, volume and alteration of your resource. So, you can confidently create your drill program, ensure better results for financing, and remove the expense of unnecessary drilling."

"The winds of change may be upon us. I preached this before, if the Quantec is accurate, you don,t need many drill holes anymore, to prove up a resource."

No doubt that Quantec is a great exploration tool. The geophysical information it provides can guide a drill program to ensure companies get the best bang for their drilling buck ("remove the expense of unnecessary drilling"). However, I disagree with your statement, Sculpin, where you say "you don't need many drill holes anymore, to prove up a resource." For now, mineral deposits still need to be delineated with drilling. Sure, you don't need many drill holes to discover a resource (if that's what you meant), but to move a resource into the proven and probable category (which is the original premise of this thread, right?) it will take no less than every drill hole necessary to do so, no matter what Quantec says. And the amount of drilling necessary will depend on the size of the deposit.

Maybe some day in the future when the technology is far more advanced, 43-101 resource estimates will be based on Quantec surveys, but for now, mineral deposits still have to be proven using traditional deliniation methods.

For those who believe I am being negative, I will say SLI does not need a resource in the "Proven and Probable" category in order to be sold or taken out. The disovery of a resource alone is sometimes enough to trigger buyers, provided the drill results show without a doubt that a world class deposit exists (ie: consistently mineralized holes over a defined strike length that show good grade over long intervals).

My original point, which may have been lost, is that when JW pointed out that David Rosenberg one of the worlds most famous economists and strategists has advised buying gold companies with "proven and probable" reserves, Rosenberg is talking about the categories "proven and probable" as outlined by 43-101 reporting regulations, not that if drill results show gold in the anomoly it is "proven" and that the chances the other anomolies have gold are now "probable" as speculated by JW.