The Canaccord note is important, because it formally states some of the doubts which have been previously posted on this, and other, forums.
Canaccord are obviously concerned about the continuity of the orebody, because, if the continuity is actually less than assumed, then not only is there less graphite present, but the remaining ore is of poorer grade. A key line in their note states:
"TON have previously chosen to only release the high-grade portions of the holes,and the grade and lithology of the intervening zones is consequently referred to as mineralised waste in Triton's announcements."
They go on to say that:
"We examined all the Diamond core on section N1 through to the central core of the deposit ... and it was clear from our interpretations that the continuity is not as good as shown in section N7, specifically."
"High-grade zones in GBNC0010 (from 40 to 150m) are not found up-dip in hole GBNC009, the hole immediately to the east"
There are several other cases quoted, suggesting that continuity is not as claimed, and conclude that:
"We feel the current geological interpretations are overly simplistic and a significant amount of extra drilling will be required next year".
Canaccord clearly believes that there is a "significant accumulation of graphite at Nicanda Hill". But the broad drill spacing, and limited analysis reporting so far, leaves the estimates of ore grade and quantity open to question. And if anyone thinks Canaccord are being hard to please, talk to the finance people at an investment bank. They are the important ones, and they really know how to ask hard questions. What is likely to be their reaction, when Canaccord sum up their study with:
"...we view the Nicanda Hill project as still in exploration stage and economically uncertain as more detailed geological information becomes available".
Cheers, Prime1
Expand
(20min delay)