"As for letting property lapses - seems to me concious decisions have been made in that regard. Tesoro has and always will be the flagship. The value and prospects of the other properties have been vastly overstated in my opinion and it is prudent for small exploration companies to focus on one property. It is a common investing fallacy in exploration companies - everyone always thinks the properties "it's company" has are so vaiuable. In-situ calcuations and extrapolating are so, so common in trying to attach value to these properties....fallacy, a huge one. There are many multi-million ounce properties getting pitiful valuations - companies with 43-101s. Why should SLI hold onto these other properties that clearly there is little interest in from the exploration and mining companies around the world. Focus on Tesoro - a smart move by management."

bigjohn,

by stating the common practices within the mining industries you are simply dancing around the actual point. I don't think anyone would disagree that letting properties lapse, optioning properties, selling properties, purchasing properties or any other type of property management is common practice within the industry. It seems like stating the obvious.

The issue at hand is the various ways in which SLI has managed their properties and the communication of the decisions by management.

If any of the following strategies were to be carried out by management do you feel it would be considered material information that should be disclosed to the public?

• optioning a property or part thereof
• selling a property or part thereof
• purchasing a property or part thereof
• allowing a property or part thereof to lapse

I feel it is material information...do you not agree?

In reference to your point regarding the relative value of properties to a company's asset base...the reality is... it is not up to you, I, management or any other individual to determine. It is the public who decides as a collective, and it is why public disclosure of clear, complete, timely, concise, and accurate material information is necessary...so much so that it is required by law. It is for the simple purpose that the public as a whole can determine the relative value of a company including it's assets with all relevant information necessary to make an educated decision. It's logical and not rocket science.

This "public disclosure of clear, complete, timely, concise, and accurate material information" is the issue at hand regarding the management team and the board of directors inability and clear inaction to hold those responsible accountable.

S.