A structural geologist I know has looked at the first twenty-two holes at Eastford Lake and compared them to the first sixty-six drill holes at Lakeshore/West Timmins Thunder Lake discovery and it is his opinion that the EL results are stronger in terms of vein strength, total godl intercepts, and overall structure.

The nay-sayers were saying the same thing to Holmer Gold a few years back before they gave it to LSG who sank a shaft and now have a1.3M ounce deposit. Then the doubters said the same thing to Lakeshore and West Timmins all last year and earlier this year where skinny widths and marginal grades were the order of the day until they launched a deep bomb into a big porphyry which is now 170m thick and growing.

The key to the Timmins Gold Camp lies in the porphyry structures and since Pearl Lake was 230m thick and spit out 30m ounces between Hollinger and McIntyre and the recent Rusk Porphyry at LSG/WTM has yielded an 83.4m section running 12.75 g/t while being around 170m thick, what would one choose to conclude with a 270m think porphyry called the Eastford Lake Porphyry???

Don't be too quick to write off Eastford, Schor. Really happy you and the rest of the gang have "free shares" while some of us refuse to dump into every 10-cent rally in the stock. To call Eastford #7 nothing more than "pocket gold" is shortsighted and misleading. Eastford Lake could be the start of the next Timmins Gold Camp.

Let's do a review on hole #67 at EL and compare the results to hole #67 at Thunder Creek - that is 45 holes away.

As far as West Timmins Porcupine is concerned, it was put together before any results came back at either EL or PG101, so to think it is the top priority for the EXS drilling is wrong. Eastford Lake is numero uno at this point. Period. SS by PB