First, the Snow White zone is reported to be exposed at surface over an area of 60m by 290m. When you compare that to T1 with a zone of 40x100 for 4000sq m and yielding 12M tons when projected to 1000m which would give us roughly 1.2M ounces, following the same logic, Snow White would yield:

60*290*1000*3g/t*3tons/m cubed/31.1g/ounce=5M ounces WOW!!!

So the potential of Snow White alone is quite robust as a stand alone mining project if assays support it and that is why I am still very excited about this project.

Now, T1's 12m tons projection is based on 4k sq meters at surface projected like an elevator shaft down to the 1000m mark, the economical cut off depth proposed by JT. However, looking at the latest drill map, it is very clear that our mineralized envelop is much bigger than the 4k sq m exposed at surface. In their corporate presentation, they postulate that T1 could be between 12 and 23M tons of rock. So T1 could be any where from 1.2M ounces to almost 2.4M ounces by itself assuming 3g/t as per the bulk tonnage results. Now, they are saying that there is potential for "significant extentions to the southwest" so the 23M tons could end up on the conservative side. However, it was their geochem that is leading them to postulate this and I will look forward to drilling results there before really getting excited about this.

T2 is another interesting zone. in their presentation they say T2 represents 8M tons of rock or 770k ounces at 3g/t, a very respectable addition to our resource (technically, it is too early to call this a resource but what the heck, I am just an armchair want to be geologist) However, when you look at the map again, you can see a gap between the zones of T2 that has now been drilled and the drill results in this gap have assays pending but both holes hit VG so I have no doubt that T2 at 8M tons is on the conservative side.

Now the road/ascot zone: This is the area where me and Lar disagreed about it being economical. After the drilling results were posted, I was not impressed with this zone. It was deep, same grade appearance but the results so far lacked the bulk size that is needed to make our grade economical. However, in their latest NR, they now say they will bulk sample this zone. I called Frank last week to ask what was up here, I thought this was deep. Well, it turns out that this long (825m) section rises to the surface the further west we go. So now we have a zone, that not only starts at surface but appears to be wider at surface. So all of a sudden a zone that to me seemed un economical, now seems to have at least the potential to be economical. The bulk sample here will give us our grade again and if we are still in the 3g/t area, then this long vein, starting at surface may very well be economical, especially as an extra source of ore to T1&2 and Snow White.

So our potential here is still great and 100M tons by March/April is possible IMO.

Hole 127 which the company clearly wanted to mention in the last NR is a topic that some are nervous about raising expectations. However, I would like to discuss it in line with hole 49 from Noront. Noront published visual results from hole 49 not once but twice before assays were released. Talking to JJ about that hole, she was very eager to discuss it's great potential. We all know what hole 49 did for Noront: They went from 62 cents to $3.01 in a matter of 1 month.

Now, I believe hole 127 has the same potential here. I am raising expectations here and I am well aware of that and I apologize to Dany and others who really wish to minimize those expectations. However, when you consider that we are getting only about $28 per ounce of gold in the ground for T1&2 at this point, we have very little to lose here so the down side here is minimal. On top of that, with the nugget effect, I do not expect this hole to show great grades...and we do not need anything special here. All we need to show is that this hole is within a mineralized envelop and that could be something as low as .3g/t. So those that read here and understand the nugget effect, understand the hydraulic fracturing model proposed by JT and supported by MacMillan, understand that we have an exposed area of 60*290 at surface will know that this hole and 1 or 2 more would prove the existence of a mineralized area and support the potential of a 5M ounce resource at Snow White. I do expect our SP to react very favorably relatively quickly if hole 127 shows anything of decent value however, do not get discouraged if the market takes some time to understand what we have. When Noront announced hole 49 visuals, the SP went from 62 to 69 back to 60 before 2 weeks later taking off on a run that ultimately took it to $3.01.

Please excuse the long post but these are the thoughts that have been swirling in my brain for the last few days. Hoov or anyone else on here, please feel free to pick apart my numbers or my reasoning.

Glorieux