Sure. The email reply about "working every day" on funding was given after the April 2nd "expanded ZTEM report" NR. Even though it was a very positive report- what could be bad about finding new targets?- there was some criticism that this might divert attention from getting the drilling started on the primary targets at HM. Some seemed worried that JB wasn't keeping his "eye on the ball" and might be spending time chasing more new rainbows instead. So it was reassuring that JB, himself, responded that no- that wasn't the case- that, indeed, the first priority was to get the funding for the drilling at HM and to get that drilling started as soon as possible. So in that sense, I felt it was a very positive statement. However, although it states the intention, it doesn't tell us when that intention might be realized. Despite the best of intentions and efforts, that still depends on the response of investors to that effort. And that's where bylo's question comes in- asking about investors' "serious interest". And it's probably so that it is that side of the equation that can't be specifically revealed, except in a public NR. It also may be so- and this is an optimistic interpretation- that on March 4, as noted by bylo, it might have been okay to say in an NR that there was "increasing interest"- if a deal wasn't actually imminent. That is- on a scale from 0 to 100 you could say interest was increasing even if interest went from 5 to 10, for example. Not much interest, actually, but increasing nonetheless. However, if a deal is now much more imminent- saying interest is "serious"- say 80-90 on the same scale- may be too much to state at this time- until the deal is actually concluded. It may be just quibbling about semantics- increasing vs serious- but it may be why bylo's question couldn't be answered at this time.
