To: kidl who wrote (11208 ) 9/9/2001 12:10:55 PM From: main_vein Respond to That's a very neat observation. I think your first conclusion is closer to the way it is. SVBN total land mass is huge and covers virtually the entire prospective intrusive complex. The favourable geology, of course, is an irregularly shaped "blob" but you can't stake irregularly shaped claims. You have to stake ground in "rectangles" so to speak, (ie, property boundaries are north-south and east-west) therefore, a percentage of each property lies on what is presently considered to be "unprospective" geology. Because the NAI and MGJ properties are considerably smaller than the SVBN total, a greater percentage of each of those properties (relatively speaking) covers the favourable geology than the percentage of the SVBN property covering the favourable geology. Furthermore, in the past, more work has been done on and in the vicinity of the MGJ and NAI properties as that general area of the North Gabbro is where most of the previous success has come from. There are already "better" developed drill targets in that area than on other parts of the property so naturally, more attention and exploration $ will be focused there initially. I think the higher ratios of exploration expenditures on those properties represent the fact that they are generally considered to have better potential than elsewhere, rather than any superior negotiating abilities my NAI or MGJ management. You do have to give them credit however, for having the tenacity to not follow the herd.
