The closest article to the truth: http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page103118?oid=154906&sn=Detail&pid=102055

While I do expect a downgrade of the resource I do not expect it to vanish. When I examined the assays I too reduced the totals as part of my statistical approach. I knocked off 30-70% on some of them to get a more accurate average over the length. I expect a revision of up to 45% once more data comes in. What I do not doubt is that BGM will become a take over target. The conceptual vision for the huge tract of land may be optimistic but even if cut in half would make this attractive. I think they have an accessible 15 million ounces. It will take at least 5 years of drilling to bring up a sizeable resource. I think this is what the company was trying to get across.

We have to take not the under securities law the BC securities did not take offense to the language since BGM did make their case that it was conceptual in nature as prescribed by the rules. Instead, they want to dive in deep and take on the company who produced it before the second opinion comes in! Good grief. Why not wait for the second opinion and if the sp drops then so be it. See what the average comes out to between the two opinions and then takle the methodolgy. My my my.