I want to second what Destinator has written. Explor is an exploration play; by definition, a small exploration company has to have a number of things go right, in addition to having a strong prospective property. Rumors, leaks, weather, vendettas, etc. can have a devastating impact on a small exploration company, even if they ultimately prove to have the goods. Dilution is a constant threat. Shareprice is not a particularly good measure in the short term for such companies. This is a retirement investment, not a quick, speculative play. Exploration is a difficult and imprecise art/science. The engineering is complex. This is also true of majors with deep pockets.
The real issue, for me, is if I believe there is evidence of fraud. If so, sell your position and pursue legal action. If not, read more and study the geology, stay positive. Is the company meeting its goals, even if there are frustrating delays sometimes? Does the switch to shallower exploration invalidate the model? Absolutely not. We have hit gold consistently at both the shallower and the deeper intercepts. As for finding the nosefold, that will require patience, and there is a hottub with your name on it if you can stick with the program. If we had continued to step out the drilling and gone deeper and failed to continue to intercept gold, then you'd have have concerns. But "open on strike and at depth" suggests to me that you just keep following the trail. The deeper drilling is expensive, so perhaps a return to shallower drilling makes sense in terms of building shareholder value at this time. The quest for the deeper, richer material can wait.
Aside from the fall in shareprice, I see nothing that demonstrates failure in terms of geology or engineering. Would I prefer to be at $1 or even $0.50 right now? Of course. But until I see outright failure, I'm patiently long, with a multiple year perspective.
Sorry for rambling on,
RTR
