Slate Grocery REIT T.SGR

RE: There was no discussion , RCI, of ....

[mbgld]

I have a few comments and questions for your post retiredminer: 1. Could you respond to how well SGR sp has responded on release of previous drill results? As I can recall not to stellar. Drilling Confirms New Geological Model at Rice Lake – 31 g/tonne over 6.5 m in new zone September 5, 2007 Dale Ginn, CEO of San Gold Corporation (SGR: TSX-V) is pleased to report that drilling from the 32nd level (4800 ft deep)of the Rice Lake gold mine has resulted in the discovery of multiple significant new zones as highlighted by hole #32-07-05 which intersected 30.7 g/tonne (0.90 oz/ton) over a width of 6.5 meters (21.3 feet). All of the intersections as listed below are new, have not been previously reported and are not included in the company’s most recent mineral resource estimation (ACA Howe, 2007). Our sp price increased to the $1.4 level from the $1.2 level. Today we closed at $1.33. Lake shore has no infrastructure in place and have still to sink a shaft to perform further drilling and they seem to be leaving us in the dust. JMO Next NR New High Grade Discovery - 113 g/tonne over 1.5 m drilled at Rice Lake October 15, 2007 Dale Ginn, CEO of San Gold Corporation (SGR: TSX-V) is pleased to report that drilling from the 30th level (4500 ft deep)of the Rice Lake gold mine has resulted in the discovery of a new high grade zone as highlighted by hole #30-07-12 which intersected 113 g/tonne (3.30 oz/ton) over a width of 1.5 meters (5.0 feet). This drill program has been designed around the new geological model as discussed in the press release dated September 5, 2007 which is testing the footwall side of the host unit at higher elevations in the Rice Lake mine. All of the intersections as listed below are new, have not been previously reported and are not included in the company's most recent mineral resource estimation (ACA Howe, 2007). Hole # From To Length Gold g/tonne (oz/ton) 30-07-12 31.2 m 32.7 m 1.5 m (5.0 ft) 113.1 (3.30) 30-07-11 28.9 m 31.8 m 2.9 m (9.5 ft) 14.1 (0.41) 30-07-04 23.4 m 25.8 m 2.4 m (7.9 ft) 9.9 (0.29) All of the above listed intersections are accessible and nearby existing mine infrastructure. Drilling continues to test the potential as generated by the new geological model as repeated below. New Geological Model Recent geological work has focused on the structural component of the deposition of the gold bearing veins as being the primary reason for their location. Past operators and explorers had focused on the hangingwall or north portion of the host "gabbro" unit due to a belief that a slight chemical change in the host unit contributed to a greater concentration of veining and gold mineralization on the hangingwall side versus the footwall or south side. San Gold and consulting geologists now believe that the vein deposition is mainly structural in nature and should be prospective throughout the entire 200m (600ft) thick host unit. The result of this profound change in interpretation is that the entire thickness of the host unit from surface to maximum mine depth (currently over 1.9 vertical Kms or 5500 ft) becomes prospective for veining and gold mineralization. Our sp dropped from $1.42 to $1.32 and did not increase to $1.43 till Oct 26. So lately a good NR does not seem to help our sp. These NRs in my opinion are better than lake shore golds latest NR. 2. Apparently we are a producing gold mine which comes with a considerable amount of overhead. according to Dale 50% of SGR's cost of production is labor. I am sure you know more about mining than I do so could you let me know if a camp requires the same amount of personnel to drill up results for an area as it does to mine the gold? The question as to where resources will be diverted is never silly as you put it. We could easily be at about the same amount of ozs produced as this year because management feels it is more prudent to do further drilling. 3. which brings me to my next point. If we are to believe management as to the reasons they diverted gold production we have to believe the following. 1. Management had no idea that the labor market was/is as tight as it is. If they did why would they take on further development in lieu of further production. The way I understand it is that we had enough ore to meet our target projection of production. Here is where it gets interesting. The obtaining of contract workers is a fairly recent addition to our work force. These guys are very experienced and are doing shrinkage mining that is apparently to advanced for our newly trained miners.Fair enough. That would have left our own miners available to bring up the ore that we anticipated to mine at the beginning of 2007 in order to reach 50-60,000 ozs. Why were they diverted ? At 100,000 oz/year we have a mine life of over 10 years. Surely that is enough time to prove up further ozs. Since we have designated ourselves a producing mine everyday we miss our production numbers the market will lose that much more faith in us. Here's another kicker if you want to be technical we have 2 fully producing mines. Its just that are not producing much and the mill is not processing much in return. SGR long Cheers