I was expecting more. It seems they have taken a let's start over approach which I had some fear of given what they stated in the press release a few weeks ago and how these sort of merger deals work out with the new guy always dissing the old guy and wanting a low base to build the business from which makes them look better in the next year, I had hoped that AUM management was above this approach, it seems not.

I have been through this before and it takes me back to 2005, not my idea of going forward. I spoke to previous ECU management and they are shocked at this approach. It's like they decided to make this as low as possible and then go higher from here. They couldn't have gotten these numbers any lower if they tried and I'm not happy about it.The cut-off grades and dollars used are also much lower than necessary again suggesting the ultra-conservative approach taken.I understood they were using a different methodology than Micon but this is absurd in my view and Micon is a large world class firm and I don’t even know who these CAM guys are.

It looks like only the veins with drill holes are being used plus some production stopes and mostly only the Santa Juana mine and only level 12-18 with little to no statistical spread, projections and variance allowed. A simply stupid approach for a large resource with the continuity demonstrated time and again at Velardena, in my view, and unbelievably backward when the resource exists as suggested in the potential numbers provided.

The good thing is this is bare bones and grades are much higher and no base metal credits included nor any San Diego and I expect not much if any San Mateo, Teneras, etc. I am now taking the same ultra-conservative approach as the company in now valuing the company having adjusted my target price to a $400 million market cap for a 12 month target, this is down from a 12 month $900 million target. This gives a higher value to the Velardena resource (higher grades, actually mining) than El Quevar because Velardena has 2 producing mills with increased production guidance and no value for any other assets (none for San Diego or over 80 other exploration properties or cash). I'm not happy about this bottom basement resource assessment approach and think it is 100% wrong when you have a huge resource, as resource matters to me as much as 3-5 year production forecast.

They are now using the Great Panther approach, measure only close to production resources and value based on production only. This is one of the reasons I sold Great Panther long ago because they had a tiny resource and weren't building it higher making me wonder if they could build it higher.I know it’s much higher at Velardena having been there and thoroughly reviewing the mine and all data sets and mills and knowing the work Michel/Steve put in along with Bill Lewis from Micon.

I remain fully vested and no intention of selling as there is too much value and upside in Golden Minerals.