Hi Hobbers!

You correct in your statement that ECU is leveraged only to resources, and much of the resource is in the infered category which is the lowest level of confidence. The disclaimer that ECU includes in the report is standard and a requirement for all reporting companies that have not completed the full study necessary to upgrade to a proven reserve. I think the very fact that Velardena has been mined profitably for more than a hundred years is a good indication of the real potential, and also that ECU has done so much mining under real operating conditions. The big difference in a reserve classification is the inclusion of economic parameters to verify profitable mineral inventory, and ECU has been demonstrating this for years, even while operating as a test mine for the MC zones. The other factor is that a higher drill density is required for a reserve classification, and much of the deposit for ECU has not been drilled off to that degree.

My point of view on this matter is very simple: If you can mine it, run it through a mill, and ship concentrate and dore with positive cash flow, then it matters not what the numbers look like on a report. There are many projects that look great on paper that never work in the real world, and many projects that work under real mining conditions that were never documented under reserve reporting criteria.

The fact that ECU has not done the drilling to upgrade the data is more a reflection of the fact that they have so much discovery drilling to complete. With so many targets to prove up new resource blocks, why waste that time and money to go back and drill off what you already know you have? JMHO...

cheers!

mike