InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Imperial Whazoo

06/05/18 7:05 PM

#17206 RE: tisdal #17188

Tisdal - Up till now, I've seen things as you do, pretty much, but as regards the following, this is no longer the case.

Specifically, I would appreciate you elaborating on what you said, which was

"This implies somewhere at the end of June which tells me they have what they are looking for in the primary zones and see no need to test the secondary zones nor will they attempt to test the other 2 zones that are not part of the original test program"

Specifically, why does it tell you that they see no need to test the secondary zones? The specific wording you quoted says:

at least, the primary targets

which is altogether different than concluding that it implies they see no need to test the secondary zones. "At least" is clear and it does not mean that they can logically be concluded to not be testing.... and so forth. It just does not follow, IMHO. Sorry.

And, following along the same line of thought, there is a similar problem with saying

nor will they attempt to test the other 2 zones that are not part of the original test program

I just don't see the connectors internal to any logic that would cause you to conclude these two things and, in case I'm missing something, I'd appreciate you fleshing your reasoning out a tad.

TIA

Imperial Whazoo