Stone,

Good post. Yes, it's a fine line between the current "pace" of discovery and the "cost" in doing so. Unfortunately the latter means more dilution for us.

Hidden between this line...yes, get rid of the contract for this board...hush hush...we can do this for free on SH. And Leeners can put up Bell videos on YouTube for no cost too. Now back to our regularly scheduled programme...

We may not need a discovery per se on the current well, but the more serious the indicater mineralization, the more the stock should rise...well, maybe not. But Marsh should be able to explain his models and thinking to serious institutions and the geo consultants who really understanding the stuff. In a word, more financing to continue. Live to fight another day.

My old post about the majors being wrong was probably not specific enough. Hopefully Marsh will show their mistake as one of direction or should I shall location of being "east of the porphyry intrusion."

One does wonder why all nine companies did think along the same lines and Marsh has seen a different light. The pragmatic investor in me keeps whispering that Marsh isn't right until he has proven it to be so. I don't mean that in any way to question Dr. Marsh's creditials or geo acumen. I sold here. It's just that I prefer to "know" than to "believe."