outstanding gold results, page-5

These grades are just "OK" for modern open-cut operations, but careful ore grading is needed for processing as there are both oxide and sulphide ores. There is also a hell of a lot of overburden waste to be dug out and stockpiled/ removed.

They are by no means "bonanza" grades, of say 30 g/t, but with modern machinery and techniques is a grade that can be recovered at a profit.

As far as I know, 0.5 g/t is the absolute lowest recoverable ore grade that can be mined, depending solely upon how close to the surface it is. If the 0.5 g/t ore commences at the surface, and you can just start digging, crushing and heap-leaching, then you may have a cost-effective operation.

As far as CGG goes, the actual RC results in the announcement show how "near surface" is defined - how about we look at their best result in SHO 22 of 4m @ 3.76 g/t. This is 126 to 130m below ground level, although the mineralisation commences a 99m below, at 1.27 g/t. However, that is almost 100 metres of dirt to dig out, to get to the mineralised ore.

That is a bloody big hole, and a lot of dirt. You would have to be extremely careful with costs, with significant mine planning, otherwise you may be running at a substantial loss.

If this were 20 years ago, most of the drill holes would be borderline prospects, and mothballed. Successful mining, recovery and processing today will be a completely cost-dependent exercise. The less "near to surface" it is, the more it costs, and the less economical is the deposit.

Hope this helps! I don't hold, but CGG is part of my watching brief. I'm not particularly excited by the announcement.