Well, let's go back to origins of AT12. VTEMS results indicated that this target should be moved up in drilling as it showed promise. So we drilled it sooner. The first 2 holes hit mineralization including a short section of 7% nickel. This was significant. Now we kept pounding hole after hole in difficult terrain with thick, hard overburden and kept coming up empty. However, Noront and their neutral, 3rd party P&E Engineering agreed that AT12 was significant and P&E recommended, in their 43-101 report that we spend 875k dollars drilling AT12. Noront agreed and now holes 11&12 are hitting semi massive and massive bands of sulfide bearing minerals including nickel. They are describing the context of AT12 in very similar ways as Eagle 1 including the granodiorite. They are still drilling AT 12 as they believe it is significant. So do I believe it is significant? I have trusted NOT this far, I am certainly not going to second guess them now...Maybe this is what Prof Mungall went up to confirm and direct the future drilling to help find the source of this increasing sulfide mineralization.

Cheers,

Glorieux