I for one am kinda glad that Bob Rae got involved. We're at a point now where the discussion is about what a deal is going to cost. We have someone to negotiate with. If he wasn't involved we would be back talking to a dozen+ leaders that would revolve through the door trying to negotiate conflicting deals. This way we are dealing with a group of FN through as close to a common front as we are likely to see. A deal will happen and then we will know what the costs are and what the upside is. Without a deal nothing is going to happen and will ultimately be a 'penny' stock. As to giving up 1/3 of everything take at look at the deals that have been done in the Yukon/ Nunavet/NWT/Quebec/BC and you will see that they are talking about sharing 'government' revenue. Same thing is developing in all the commonwealth countries because the British used the same settlement approach everywhere they went. As to why this is happening now blame the past 300 years of governments that didn't negotiate these arrangements when they should have. So you can either look at the upside that Bob Rae's involvement has and the share value increase we will see with a deal, or be sitting here in 30 years waiting for someone to make 'it' happen. ME, I want the negotiations to move forward and a deal to be reached so that the government can make infastructure decisions, NOT can make a mining decision, and the market can make a decision as to what our shares are worth with a viable ore body! ... Been There