I too await recovery numbers..........let's look at the track record and history on the project.

N77.......Do you recall that the Micon announcement came out of ISM camp way back in May/2008?

http://www.inspirationmining.com/news.html?id=81

Kian J. released his report and many posters said it was a possible glimpse at what could be expected from Micon.

http://www.inspirationmining.com/news.html?id=113

There were some delays and there was also some extra drilling at the request of Micon.

http://www.inspirationmining.com/news.html?id=117

We did not see the end result until Jan 2010. It took nearly three years to produce that and the markets were let down by it.

http://www.inspirationmining.com/news.html?id=125

In a nutshell here's what we got after a lot of waiting.

http://www.inspirationmining.com/news.html?id=121

Does it seem like these guys (Micon and ISM) were quick with the task at hand? I would say no, does it see like they did a thorough job? I would say yes.

Did it seem we recieved everything that was described in the original commissioning NR? I would say no. I do not know if they are working on phase 2 or not. Having said that, I would think so as it makes a lot of sense to discover if something is worth chasing before spending time and precious money chasing it. Afterall what are the next logical steps in this business?

You do bring up an interesting point.

"So what if only 15% of the Langmuir Property has been explored! One can basically put down a drill anywhere and find the low grade Ni numbers in the Shaw Dome that ISM has been releasing lately. In the end, it will have to be of a grade that can be recovered economically and that is why it is so important that ISM show the Recovery %‘s on the bulk of their Resource discovered to date from the L-2 in the next Ni 43-101. If ISM can’t even show that their already released "low grade average resource" and recovery % work financially, who cares about the even lower grades they are touting now. Everyone had expected to see the recovery % of the bulk of ISM’s low grade resource last time round. No doubt many shareholders have let ISM know they had better show them this time. Will the company listen and provide these numbers? "

One would think that ISM management along with Andre (the new Geo for Langmuir) working along with previous and possibly present guidance and direction from Micon, would realize and have that same conclusion. This is afterall their field of expertise.

What if the 15% of Langmuir has or does prove out as economic grades and viable to mine by open pit means?

Why are they now touting the "high tonnage lower % Ni" theme for Langmuir? The open pit amenable prospects and the possibility of now 4 ore zones? At his stage of the Langmuir game are they simply rolling the dice? Taking a flyer on the whole show?

As if the old figures weren't enough

"Pursuant to the Micon Report, resources in the Indicated Resources category for the Langmuir North deposit are 8,324,000 tonnes grading 0.40% nickel, as detailed in Table 1. Resources in the Indicated Resources category for the Langmuir No. 1 deposit are 1,733,000 tonnes grading 0.51% nickel"

At the time of writing for the Miocn report, it would appear that Micon has gone on record saying they did not have the details you were expecting they would have and or ISM would have . Micon said it in the report.

As quoted:

"Given the early stage of the project’s development, no detailed information is available in respect of operating costs for mining, processing and general and administration in respect of a potential open pit mining operation. As well, no geotechnical information is available upon which to estimate an overall slope angle. Consequently, Micon derived estimates for these items on the basis of its experience in the region and from general knowledge. It is to be noted that the estimates presented are only for the purpose of developing an initial optimized open pit shell, and the assumed values will likely change with further detailed work."

I agree with you that we need the numbers eventually. It would be logical that ISM feels the same way and will proceed accordingly. They seem to be proceeding as evidenced by recent exploratory drilling in the KCC Allerston area in the NW. The talk of the project having a high tonnage low Ni% prospect.

In light of that possiblity, I have been interested in reading about any projects having similar or even lower grades. I wonder how are they viable and what are they doing that makes them so? I found the readings re: Turnagain (Hardcreek Nickel) interesting. The nature of near surface easily accessible economic mineralization has to be a plus here. Whether it is economic to mine is the unknown by me.

We talked about LBE projects, we talked about Ursa's projects we talked about Turnagain. It would see that there is technology to deal with and handle lower grades especially in Sulphides as opposed tot Laterites.

Lastly, you talk of the market having already decided and judged ISM. I was curious to watch National Bank pick up a decent amount of shares in the market over the last three months.

http://agoracom.com/ir/Inspiration/forums/discussion/topics/477047-institutional-ownership-up-in-these-last-three-months/messages/1538166#message



http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/financialHighlights?symbol=ISM.TO

Well it looks like National may be the house behind the institutional buying we have seen in the last three months (+3,014,700 shares net). Not sure if what is bought and sold on the Alpha Trading System shows up here either?

FEBRUARY:

MARCH:

JANUARY: