OTCQX:NTGSF - Post by User
Comment by
WatsonLakeMineron Feb 18, 2018 8:24pm
![](https://assets.stockhouse.com/kentico-cms/0341-00/images/Sprite.svg#id_Post_Views_Icon)
117 Views
Post# 27581692
RE:RE:RE:RE:GPY can expect similar questions on 3 Aces
RE:RE:RE:RE:GPY can expect similar questions on 3 Aceseasycoder wrote: After getting buggered with the YESAB decision on Brewery Creek (where the FN supported GPY) I expect the Sheriffs are very aware of what regulatory requirements they will have to face if they expand beyond the exploring permits that are already in place.
They also have permits to process more sample bulk tonnage. Beyond that Bill has stated before this is too big (aka district scale) a deposit to be developed by GPY.
While he may look for a JV I think he is looking to come up with several REs & a PEA then sell to a major. He pretty much said as much in one or more of his resource conference presentations.
Ok, so he wants the same as every other major holder of junior mining shares. District scale is simply another click bait term and is meaningless until its not.
Promoters are promoters.
I like the 3 Aces geology, thats why I own the stock. New blood is needed before it can show its true potential.