Comparing Goldstorm with KSMI am a longstanding shareholder of Seabridge. I see there are people here on this site saying Tudor has an advantage over Seabridge because it doesn't need tunnels. The reason Seabridge has designed a project with tunnels is because they had to find a large valley suitable for holding billions of tonnes of tailings. The only workable site was many miles from the mines. Any large operation in the area will need to find a suitable tailings location. So before Tudor shareholders claim an advantage over Seabridge, they had better figure out where they are going to put their tailings and also large amounts of waste rock generated in mining. Have Seabridge and nearby Pretium tied up all the suitable sites? The waste rock is likely to be acid generating, another problem Tudor would have to face to get a permit, as Seabridge did. Bottom line: Tudor Gold is so early stage in its development that any comparison with KSM is slightly ridiculous.