Zenyatta Ventures Ltd

When does this end? How does this end? How often is an update required? (The presentation released this week is already misrepresenting the costs by 71/76, or almost 7%.)

What comes next? Did anybody ask Aubrey? Does Peter Wood realize what he put on the line by certifying a presentation that fails the requirements of NI 43-101?

I've never seen this type of reporting before. I'm open to suggestions or interpretations, to help me to understand. Maybe others might understand as well. I hope so.

The most important element, IMHO, is claiming 30kt/a by 2018. Geez, ZEN doesn't even have to permit or commission their mill, one would have to assume, given that environmental assessments would take three years.....before any tree cutting/surface preparation/overburden removal/construcition of permanent structures/or whatever was even allowed to begin. Just the two years to truck overburden takes two years. However, there isn't yet a permit in place to allow them to pile it somewhere else.

What's the guy's name who keeps lying to you? Stupé? He's so irrelevant, who knows.

The production in 2018 prediction must come from the analysis of an independent Qualified Person, as I understand things. Perhaps I have been asleep at the switch. I missed that Technical Report? Please show me where an independent QP called 2018.

When I read NI 43-101, I read:

Obligation to File a Technical Report in Connection with Certain Written Disclosure about Mineral Projects on Material Properties

4.2(1) An issuer must file a technical report to support scientific or technical information that relates to a mineral project on a property material to the issuer, or in the case of paragraph (c), the resulting issuer, if the information is contained in any of the following documents filed or made available to the public in a jurisdiction of Canada:

(j) any written disclosure made by or on behalf of an issuer, other than in a document described in paragraphs (a) to (i), that discloses for the first time
(ii) a change in mineral resources, mineral reserves or the results of a preliminary economic assessment from the most recently filed technical report if the change constitutes a material change in relation to the issuer.

(5) Despite subsection (4), an issuer must

(a) file a technical report supporting disclosure under paragraph (1)(j) not later than
(iii) in all other cases, 45 days after the date of the disclosure;

So, apply 4.2(1)(j)(ii), and see if you agree?

What equipment are they going to put in the mill? Will 300 SGS bench scale clerks, doing 2kg per batch/day, deployed as robots in the mills, be processing the ore? Errr, wait, that's only 18k tonnes per year, if they can do it at the daily rate. Were labour costs included? Can they do 2 caustic bakes and two acid washes in a day? Can they match the best analytical purity results (the only ones ZEN publishes)?

The idea of a pilot plant is to find a mechanized solution for bench scale processes. On the slide Zen claims pilot plant scale up, they also indicate 30 kg yield. That is not pilot plant scale process. Sue me, it's not a pilot plant. Back calculating, they could not have procesed more than 1 tonne of material, to produce 30 kg. Where did the sample come from? How representative were the samples they processed? RPA said ore variability studies would be required, in additon to pilot plant process trials. Why would they say that?

I'm clearly confused by the disclosure. I need somebody to guide me to the truth.

Did I miss how they are equipping the mill? The scale up produced 30 kg, and there's no evidence that the ore was even represenattive before it was processed. No West Pipe material even got it past flotation. But Chahar is said to suggest that 6N is easy-peasy? Don't you need public dislosure to support even Chahar's remarks? (The answer is yes.)

What am I missing?

Please provide everyone with the public disclosure requried to clear the air. The rumours are stinking up the joint.

Lar