RE: RE: RE: Interview with BRIGUS CEO. NZ and kewi2, all god points. I could be total off base, but why would Brigus buyback a portion of the original deal and then (most likely) need to enter (even) a small deal to efficiently complete GF? Any buyback would cost them as much, or more, than a new deal. If they were smart, Brigus would try to do a small deal (say 5-6%) for $25-35M. They would still have 94-95%, no (share) dilution, no interest, nothing to repay, and plenty of cash to fund the project. This would be a win-win and really be good for Sandstorm with another deal in "safe" location. Keep in mind, Nolan Watson's recent (and repeated) comments about recent mining inflation. Every month, the whole BF/GF project is going to cost more. Brigus' best bet is to get the funding and move ahead as quickly as possible rather than slow walking the project by depending upon cash flow from BF which will reportedly just turn positive in 1Q13. Considering the Brigus "project", the next 3-6 months should bring more good news for SG. Brigus needs cash and Sandstorm wants (good) the original deal or (better) the original plus a portion of GF. That is why it is so hard to time trading SAND/SLL. If you trade any more than a small position, news could come out and drive up the shares overnight. On the other hand, if you slowly sell SG to buy S M&E ( like Nolan and David) then you have not hurt your longer term potential for the two companies combined. Who would have thought that SG would get a platium stream or that S M&E would get a platium family stream. GL