David Palmer says: "We've consolidated a property that's 70 kilometres of strike length within this Borden belt. It's massive."

Then why don't the shareholders generally feel that the agreed take-over bid by management is that massive? It appears the shareholders wanted what was more representative of that massive belt than the 5 bucks in currency, that would be easily manufacturered. My question is, in the event of a lower gold price ahead whose shares would you rather hold, our's or GoldCorp's? What bothers me so much is we are suppose to give our future away for for $5 in a senior's currency that WILL be more suseptible to lower gold prices. You could never be able to compare GoldCorp's leveraged future to our's. So the possible end event is trading in a great improving gold asset for someone else's collection of question marks that WILL NOT stand up much to a lower gold price. We were one of the best, now we are thrown into a heap collection of producing and non producting properties where a lot more can go wrong. 5 bucks, I don't think so.