Fair enough Nickels. I just noticed that you enjoy posting the bids on the ISM site while you never post the bids of LBE. Maybe you should treat the shareholders of LBE with the same concern you show at ISM. Just a thought. I do agree with you about the grade concern and it being economical over a certain point. As Whaler just copied in the .Micon press release, detailed analysis of the potential open pit at Langmuir North is very important. Since open pit production is the most econmical and efficient way to recover ore as "surethings" example showed, a much lower grade is possible, if and I admit its an if, the tonnage is large enough. A problem that was encountered at McWaters, and why its plans were changed to ramp production if I remember correctly. I find it interesting that you think that all Shaw Dome deposits should be the same size, that being small. Yet you feel that the quality of those same deposits should be so different, as in talc composition. Especially as been explained many times, ore from Langmuir has been mined and milled in the recent past. Note that there is no mention of open pit mining at L1. Since a ramp is already in place, existing drill results do indicate much higher grades to similiar deposits such as Hart at that location. My observations of the drill results at Langmuir North seem to show large strike true width lengths of low grade ore. It seems to me that many results show an average of .25 to .50 percent with lots of results showing well over your .60 cut off concern. Since much of the 275 drill results at both sites are drilled so close together as infill we should hope to see some very acurate tonnage, one would hope. And we shall see in good time. I hope your right and that the resource and scoping studies are close to completion by these highly esteemed companies. Only then will your concerns be satisfied. Let's hope.