The simplest answer is usually the truth, but we take every tidbit of information and start twisting it and cooking up some theory to fit with what we want to be happening, because it isn't possible that we are not one of Teck's first-line priorities.

I agree that the theories appear to be desperate at times to make everything a good event. However, I don't expect all Teck employees to know about the status of every junior. Clearly a year ago they staked claims all between Galore Creek and Schaft Creek so it had to be on someone's priority list at that time.

Thanks for the feeback WN, we're obviously starved for any information we can get.

I found it interesting that when you asked about the transfer of Liard shares you meant from Teck to us now that the feasibility is out, but he answered as if you were talking about the transfer of shares from us to Teck, when they earn back their interest. He was a step ahead of us, in effect. He also jumped ahead to say that we would move forward with or without Teck, but you were trying to establish whether we would have 100% ownership at that point.

They seem determined to skip over the Liard transfer. I believe when he said the value of Liard wouldn't become apparent for a decade or so, he meant that the profit to those shares wouldn't be there for that long. (I don't think he meant they wouldn't know what the value was.) It almost sounded like you were talking at cross purposes and he didn't understand that you were one step behind him because we haven't been told the feasibility is bankable yet!

I thought it was interesting too that he said a joint NR would be issued once Teck had arrived at a decision. See Teck doesn't believe what happens with the juniors is of material importance to them so they don't issue NR when events happen like the release of our feasibility. As an example, when they recently turned down the CCY deal, Teck themselves did not issue a NR. They would only issue a joint NR if they had something they considered material--like an acquisition.

Without wishing to fall into the trap of twisting the information myself, it did sound like Mike was making bigger assumptions than we are--or at least that I am.