josimar – the only underwhelming thing here is your understading of how mineral exploration works.
Lets take a look at some of your assertions that you make. You claim that the 280sq/km area is entirely exhausted because it has a grand total of 24 drill holes and has been drilled by a total of 3 drill campaigns. Even reducing the geology down to a 2 dimensional puzzle you do realize that with say the footprint of the Mt Leyshon orebody as an example, that there is enough spatial search area to fit over 100 Mt Leshon sized orebodies in the areas that haven't been drill tested yet?
If three different drill campaigns is your idea of adequetely testing the ground then you would have walked away from the Mt Leyshon, Mt Carlton, Ernest Henry and Lake Cowal ore bodies leaving them for someone else to discover.
I might also draw to your attention the map in Fig.2 around Mt Brady that has drilling intercepts of 1m and 3m with gold grades from 2.3 to 17.4g/T Au all at open pittable depths. Yes you can scoff at those early holes at the moment as they may fall below a minimum mining width of 3m, but do you know that MIM had a prospect with say a dozen holes in it back in the 1980s with the best result being one hole of 2m at 7.9g/T Au? You know what happened when Conquest tested around this old MIM hole years later?
You also don't seem to understand how geophysics work either, its correct that MBK are using recent helimag magnetic data (which is far superior in quality to the older first generation airborne mag) and they may be talking about ground based magnetic methods in certain areas, but crucially, this is to refine and gather more detailed data in
specific areas of interest to help assist in surface sampling and future drill hole placement and that is totally bog standard exploration techniques that has been used for decades in the industry. Unless you think its a better use of the company's time and money to walk all 280sq/km of the bush at Eidsvold with a ground magnetometer?
(20min delay)