Thanks a lot for your insights. However, in my oppinion these issues are not the most important.

In terms of gold recovery and type of ore and gold mineralization, they should have a pretty good picture based on compositions, previous mine operations in the area, and some microscopic work. If they paid a geology prof 10k to have a grad student investigate samples they would get a pretty good feel of what they are dealing with.

In terms of coarse gold, yes there could be issues. What I personally would like to see is that they try to repeat 2 to 3 of their best holes and drill them again to see if indeed they get similar numbers. That will first of all address to some extent the coarse gold issue but with good number, they will again build confidence to the investing public. Was there an assay error or not in the previous samples? We haven't had those numbers for a long time, and we need to rebuild the confidence.

Of course what we all hope for is a macro coarse gold deposit which is sufficient in size to economically mine.