The 120 ton bulk sample was a blend of low and high grade rock which was done to see how recoveries were when everything was incorporated as a run of mine feed.

High and low grade subsets were run as well to understand them individually for the simple fact that actual mine operations and plant production would be planned with felexibility in blends.

The pilot flotation plant was running 2/3 of a blended ton/ hour with a head grade slightly below 8% and the equipment is easily scalable as a modualr setup.

One step thermal is all that is needed for purification and securing a furnace is simply a matter of purchasing a furnace, they are not proprietary or difficult to come by, certianly strategic to outright purchase for in-house purification, vertically integrated being the way to go.

The purity Miller is getting through flotation and thermal treatment has the end product at the highest end of the value curve. People seem to be arguing about pricing which is fair enough when you're trying to place a number for a graphite that falls somewhere between the low and high prices for graphite ............ of which you also have to consider the purity of the graphite and its characteristics in various applications to determine the price.

Miller graphite has a unmistakable advantage over all the rest. Miller graphite floats better and to a higher purity than any other graphite out there and it purifies via thermal treatment to a higher level than any other graphite out there, including synthetic varieties as evidenced by the Oakridge report. Logic tells you that a stellar concentrate purity will take the least intensive thermal treatment than any other graphite, making Miller graphite a class of its own for cost/value differential.

Miller graphite will command prices at the very highest end of the value chain. Some graphite exploration companies reference pricing all the way up to $30,000/ton , which may be accurate or may not be, whatever the case, they use it to illustrate the spectrum of pricing for investors. All things taken at face value, of all the graphite currently being tested, Miller graphite would command far and above in value than any of the others, $30,000 it is for illustrative purposes, a purpose that all the graphite explorers have been using/referencing.

The PEA is a document regarding economics of exploiting a deposit. It has specific criteria inputs that frame the economics. As any rational person can see, Miller inputs are on the most part already established or very close. Mine operations are standard as far as excavation/extraction, crush and grind are concerned. The pilot plant provides all data related to the flotation plant engineering and throughput specs. The recent thermal treatment trials establish the purification engineering and throughput requirements. Energy, water, etc are all simple equations from there.

Resource is the bogeyman that many are pointing to which is fine as one hasn't been formalized yet, can't argue the bogeyman but can point out that that is what it is.

I'm not sure why anybody would think one isn't going to be forthcoming or that it is too difficult to establish in this type of deposition because a resource for mine justification is not defined by size/quantity alone. Cost/value play a larger role ............ the largest role, and when those numbers are at the very lowets for cost and very highest for value, the actual resource quantity can be very modest in the scale of deposits found globally yet allow a company to be more profitable than some of the majors out there on an EPS basis and so many other metrics. It's a hard concept to get around when you suggest a modest operation can pay bigger dividends to investors than a major (say gold producer) but business is all about the numbers and that is all that matters at the end of the day. It's why a small dynamic entity can out play a large conglomerate when it comes to shaholder value. It's hard to come by those opportunities as investors but there are cases out there and Miller is shaping up to be one of them.

We don't know right now what Canada Carbon is doing in establishing the maiden graphite resource, whether they are going larger footprint to bring in lower grade material or how large a footprint that might entail. The marble resource would be a straight forward block calculation as assaying is not required to quantify that resource. Graphite on the otherhand, requires assaying so this obviously dictates the amount of drilling and assaying required to be done in order to make the resource quantification.

The pilot plant blend brought in low grade and high grade for just under 8% head grade but if the company was so inclined, they could limit the maiden resource to a starter pit for the sake of the PEA. The starter pit could be indicated resource and inferred would apply to the entire footprint drilled. Inferred in this case would be a statistical analysis while the indicated would be based on the more easily quantified surface oriented veining.

Let's focus on a starter pit that might consist of two or three pods. Sticking with the modest theme, limit the starter pit to 8,000 tons of 30% grade rock, it's 2,400 tons of graphite. Call recovery 70% simply to measure against Albany numbers .......... 1,680 tons of graphite out of the flotation circuit wich only accounts for the 200 mesh and better. Canada Carbon Inc actually disclosed the recovery numbers unlike Zenyatta.

1,680 tons of 200 mesh and better concentrate all greter than 99% as established by the Oakridge preferred GDMS standard. Note that Canada Carbon Inc has disclosed recoveries and purities by sieve size classification, very transparent leaving no room for dispute.

Let's say that thermal treatment recoveries are 80% which is crazy but this is for illustrative purposes and since Miller graphite falls into the high side of pricing, giving this crazy low recovery value of 80% for thermal seems to be nice and appeasing for Zennanites to chew on. They have issues with keeping it real with numbers but they like to throw around rosy numbers and never consider anything else for Albany. Even their supposed conservative numbers are highly inflated in contrast to their peers and especially for an amorphous (microcrystalline) graphite such as Albany.

80% of the 1,680 is 1,344 tons of Nuclear grade Miller graphite (6n).

1,344 tons of Quebec certified MMG6N (Marbelous Miller Graphite 6N) will go for $30,000/ton for revenues of about $40,000,000 USD.

If you use Jon Hykawys numbers for costs, you can see the spectacular cost/value dynamic at Miller and how easily cap costs can be recovered in very quick order and a modest little Nuclear grade graphite producer like Canada Carbon Inc can challenge many majors on so many metrics related to shareholder value without going half a billion into debt, let alone billions in debt.

Getting back to that starter pit resource that could make this all happen that the resource critics are playing up currently as it hasn't been formally announced. What is the footprint of 8,000 tons of rock with an SG of 2.6?

150 x 3 x 7 ................. is that close?

VN6/VN7 have been traced at surface, could they form this size of a starter pit?

Additional, easily quantifiable resource in the historic stockpiles. Of the 8,000 tons of rock, the historic stockpiles could either be classified additive or one could incorporate them into the 8,000 making the excavated starter pit somewhat smaller.

Does the property hold 10% worth of historic 30% stockpiled ore ........ 800 tons? The math on what that volume would look like is illustrative of how small a stockpile that really is, additive or included, it's a moot point.

Sure, sure, I get it .............. numbers and scenarios can be argued all day long but the only thing that matters is what is reported................. so true.

So take a serious look at what Canada Carbon has reported in comparison to what Zenyatta Ventures has reported.

Arguing numbers in the case of Miller, with all the information Canada Carbon has disclosed is far more realistic than arguing numbers in the case of Albany as there are far too many numbers that are simply not known that really should be at this point. Recoveries and purities at every stage of the process come to mind for each and every sieve classification along with GDMS sheets correlated to them, Canada Carbon Inc has done so from day one, can't be refuted.

At this point the only question that I have with regards to the Miller resource modelling, what is the company going after at this stage? A shallow starter pit type of resource or something with a larger footprint that is inclusive of materials as far down as 40-50 mtrs.?

Isn't it quite awesome that a person can consider a starter pit as a block depth of 7 mtrs and 40-50 mtrs as a footprint outside of a starter pit classification? This is all due to the value proposition that Canada Carbon has established in Miller graphite by getting a complete grasp on metallurgy from the onset and doing so with unprecedented success.

Nobody, and I mean nobody could have saw this coming. Not Bruce Duncan, not Paul Ogilive, not Aubrey Eveleigh or team Zenyatta, not any other graphite explorer on the planet, not SGS Lakefield, not Evans Analytical, not Oakridge, nor any finished product supplier such as SGL,Graphteck and so on. Investors are a class of their own ............. none could have expected it, some may have dreamed it but only the ones that hold the stock will see the benefits of what is to come of it.

Is it a knock on any of these people or groups that they could never have seen this coming? Certainly not ............ rarely is it recognized that a discovery of this purity magnitude has been overlooked over so many years but here Canada Carbon Inc sits, metallurgy having proven that the company has done just that, recognized that this deposit has been overlooked and undervalued for far too long and they're about to fix that travesty .............. making investors some very nice coin along the way.


Quebec certification: AS'IS Dep # 30099NCP

Product reg: MMG6N (Marbelous Miller Graphite 6N) - +200 mesh - USD$30,000/ton