Allan, you bring up many good points in this regard.

The best way to determine how good, or should I say how "applicable" any one geophysical methodology is in any one environment, would be to deploy the technology under a completely blind condition where no information is given by the company prior to its application over the area of interest. This is even more significant when performing work over a very large property that has never had any previous exploration undertakings deployed to orient the survey against. 

In our current scenario, by offering SG3 ahead of any drill program, the company can offset the relatively low cost of drilling against the relatively high cost of conventional geophysical deployment coverages, and this is a very powerful statement given that SG3 targets can be tested with only 1 to 2 holes to validate the target at the proverbial sweet spot, which other systems would typically need multiples more to do the same......

Bottom line is that SG3 can allow a company to reduce drilling costs by 85 to 95 percent when testing targets generated by it, and for a small company could make the difference between success and failure......