iva bidding power rises, page-6

I am amazed the ASX has approved these releases...

Did I read it correctly...are IVA openly discussing "in ground metal content"...of an inferred resource based on historic drilling results, some of where prepared prior to the existance of JORC and/or during a time when QA and QC procedures clearly could not be compliant to current practices?

Has any other company on the exchange been allowed to report historic, non-JORC compliant results in this way...even discussing in-ground metal content?

Off the top of my head...I know CVI was not allowed to report the results on historic drilling at Cachoeiras de Binga, much of which interestingly was compiled around the same period as some of IVA's drilling...and GDN could not report their Utah u3o8 resource, again because historic drilling compiled around the same time, that might not comply with current JORC standards.

In fact there are scores of such examples littered accross the exchange, where acquired assets with previous drilling histories...or even existing historic resources...are unable to be reported due to the pre-JORC timeframes involved.

So...what is going on here?

Now...I for one support the merit of reporting previously defined resources, even those compiled pre-JORC for the simple fact the market would not be fully informed without such disclosure...BUT...is there not a problem with the ASX's consistency here?

Numerous companies are prevented from announcing the results of historic drilling similar to that released today from IVA...yet IVA seem immune from this basic rule?

Am I the only one confused?

Cheers!