Explor Resources Inc. (fka EXSFF)

[gharma]

you are not alone

Also, the resource number used is now based on a smaller 2.0 g/t threshold than in the earlier estimate (2.2 g/t). That had the effect of making the latest resource estimate larger than it would have been. However, the threshold should be moving the other way, say from 2.2 g/t to 2.4 g/t (or more) if the price of gold stays down here and/or if continued inflation is seen in mining costs. In fact, as the trailing avg price of gold factors in this 1350-1450 and the 1600ish figure can no longer be used then a future estimate will have an uphill battle to just hold the current number of ounces.

PS The note I posted in reply to PB shows why I agree with your

3. The rational which seems sketchy

in the "first thoughts of the day" post

i.e. while what CD stated is a summary of the net effect the statement appears to omit a lot of details