Taken from rules of thumb,

On vein systems, the old mining adage, “drill for structure, drift for ore”, holds true. Drill holes into veins with erratic or concentrated ore shoots can lead to seriously underestimating or exaggerating of the ore grade. In many gold vein deposits, erratic localized occurrences of course gold make sampling and assaying difficult and may require bulk testing.

IMO, this may very well be the case with our drilling. As I mentioned before in a post,that we could have a drill hole with a 100m intercept of 1g/t and hypothetically have another hole 10 feet away that will have 100m intercept of 25g/t. This may happen because of the bonanza pods and a flat spot(going to extremes). Even though the Quantec is a wealth of info on where to drill, it is still possible we can get a low grade hole as I mentioned above if the drill misses by inches. By the way, I shouldnt be calling the 100m intercept of 1g/t as not much gold, Because it is a good intercept. But what you have to do is take the average of these 2 holes to get the best understanding of this deposit.

In our case, the bulk sampling was done at depth BEFORE the drilling was done. This is a huge bonus, because we know that the chances of drilling an extremely high intercept are excellent, but if we do have a not so rosy hole, we KNOW that we just missed. With the amount of targets on this property, I dont expect very many (if any) misses.

Also, I would like to mention, where the POG is very high,and should remain at least into next fall,that whoever buys this will open pit the lower grade surface soil first. This should be done by whoever buys it as soon as possible. Right now I am seeing cutoff grades as low as 0.2 g/t being economical, I beleive we may have an average grade of surface gold over the ENTIRE property of 1g/t. And this number may be really conservative, for these reasons.

1)we already have C-1,A-4 , C-3 AND I beleive N-1 (the newest NE vein sampled) with OZ,s per ton near/at the surface.

2) the "informales" were/are highgraders, meaning they would not target the low grade stuff, leaving the 2g/t material at the surface where they dug their holes and test pits.And, there are a few diggings over the property. They wouldnt dig that much if they weren,t finding high grade gold. The more wide spread "informale" activity present, the better.

3) On the technical report there are some surface samples that were not reported in a nr yet. They are in the SW and the SE, the SW ones have some very impressive grades rivalling our highest surface grades to date. This is showing us that the possibility of finding more high grade surface gold should be very favourable, whereas there is so much of the property that hasnt been sampled/explored yet. The Quantec has lit up places that weren,t known before the report and will most likely be targeted for sampling once permits are in place.

4) By looking at the property from the subscription (i beleive thats what I have) "Google Earth", it is easy to see the same type of geological structures that contain current high grade surface gold, on other parts of the property that are yet to be tested.

So, if you do the math on the surface gold, you can see that that will be profitable at todays POG. We dont have to do the math on the sub 50m stuff, because we know "gold grades get better at depth" and the Quantec shows us that there are huge impressive anomalies that appear to be feeders for the near/at surface gold.

This is all IMO, and the way I am looking at it, I could be wrong (but I dont think so!)

3)