You also say missing guidance is a funding issue. It's only a...

You also say missing guidance is a funding issue. It's only a funding issue if the liquidity of the company falls to levels where action needs to be taken. The cash/liquidity position given in the last report is significant and one would expect it to be sufficient if the company maintains revenues from quarterly production of between 70 and 80kozs/quarter going forward. We have also been told about the expandibilty of our credit facility and another poster who spoke with JW directly said there was a significant VAT payment owing to the company from the government of Mali.

I still maintain that your "shocker" comment was unfounded and hasty considering the projections of the mining rates from the Syama UG published by RSG in July and "the emperor wears no cloths" comment which I assume might have been directed at me is yet to be determined. I feel very comfortable in my garments for the moment.

As mentioned before the only concern for me about my investment in RSG is that the ore ramp-up proceeds to the expected levels, roughly within the expected time frame, and that the targeted recoveries from Project 85 are met and that steady state UG ore production can be sustainably maintained with few interruptions. Given external consultants have reported that 4Mt/annum is a feasible production rate and that steady state is only 2.4Mt/annum, logic would dictate that 2.4Mt/annum should be quite easily achievable once all teething problems are overcome. It's then just a matter of sitting back and waiting for the power solution to be implemented in 2020 and collecting some dividends along the way.

I will leave then panic over meeting guidance for people who like to panic. My concern is that the mine looks like working in the first place. Esh