No probelm at all. All replies are welcome as they serve to focus future discussion directions from different angles of opinion. Many geologists us hindsight parallels relating to earlier historical exploration programs to build rationals on what "should have been done" years earlier. Geologists will use the "need to go deeper" adage when earlier shallow results dont return an ore body. It's usually only after someone tests a theory at a later date that this type of stuff comes out.

The Holmer deposit (Lakeshore) was already "brown ground" when Lakeshore decided to take a chance and drill underneath the existing workings but the EXS Bristol project is a very different animal indeed. Earlier drilling on this property was already as deep as it needed to be to match the levels that the neighboring Holmer deposit was historically mined to and as such, it can be said today that the EXS property will not be a replica of the Lakeshore deposit model.

I beleive that what EXS may have is NEW and possibly even better environment to explore due to the geological stratigraphy being much more extensive than the Lakeshore which is very much constrained within a tightly folded ultramafic intrusive setting. The vast porphry trends being present around the Lakeshore deposit indicates that the alteration-plumbing system that fostered tye Lakeshre model is very, very large and if EXS can hit the property with a big enough budget they have a better than average chance of finding out......