Those were the exact same questions i had, which is why i put the question out there to see if any of you had heard a similar expaination or had any insight into whether this explaination could be reasonable in any way. I couldn't imagine how they could be dumb enough to not provide an explaination that simple if that were the case...

he's a broker in my home town, by no means a big shot, but 3rd gen mining family and seems to know everyone and everything about the industry... at least to someone who knows as little as me! ;)

a friend of mine told me that the company told him that the "new" resource estimate that seems to indicate we've lost 500,000 oz is actually an old 43-101 from last Feb that they decided to re-release for the tsx listing as the TSX would not allow them to add the newly indicated/discovered resources (500,000 oz) to the old estimate and would have required them to spend some big $$$ to do an entirely new 43-101 if they wanted to include these oz's. So rather than shell out, they decided the older report showing fewer ozs was good enough to get the listing pushed through, but those 500,000 ozs are not lost, they are still there, just not on the old 43-101 they are using to get the listing.

Has anyone else heard anything about this? I'm kind of green so is this a totally unrealistic explaination?

Cheers,