Ann: Quarterly Activities/Appendix 5B Cash Flow Report, page-237

Some comments about Q3 drill collars.

New holes (collar and assay data) in and around Cuerpos 2 and 3. Assay data from previously reported holes at Cuerpo1.

Spatial location of new holes

Cuerpo 2



Cuerpo 3



====================
Summary of predictions for Q3 pending assays C2/3.



Cuerpo 2 has some good zones near surface which did not appear to extend too far laterally or perhaps to depth.

=========================

Reconciliation of Q2 predictions with Q3 reported/inferred results.

[Inferred meaning assays below 0.2% cut off grade are assumed not to have been reported and are therefore NSR. Note that NSR could just be below cut off grade and part of low grade halo(s) rather than completely barren.]



The geological fundamentals appear to be becoming predictable even with the limited data available in the quarterlies. This does not mean there will be no surprises, there always are, but Cuerpos 2 and 3 are becoming more constrained as the drill density increases. To be hoped for and expected though bigger would be even better.

Steve Garwin was optimistic about increases to the Cuerpo 3 MRE based on holes 124, 134 giving extensions of 80m for vertically extensive panels of 'new' mineralisation. These and surrounding holes will bulk up the existing MRE after which the depth extensions may be the major source of any further C3 increases IMO in the absence of 'surprises'.

Cuerpos 2 and 1 are being constrained more but quite difficult to get a good feel for. I suspect Q3 drilling will be fairly definitive for near surface C2 dimensions.

==================

Drilling logistics:

• Some shallow holes in the Q2 report were extended with diamond tails. 129/30 details etc. were not reported in Q3 so it is uncertain if they had tails.
• There were probably some holes abandoned and re drilled.
• Multiple holes from the same site drilled at different azimuths and dips. Ditto Q2 where multiple targets/objectives were being pursued.
• Google Earth and Sentinel imagery:
• Google Earth: Early Carola and HCH drill pads that were not obviously drilled (GE pre ?2019) are gradually being used (e.g. 5-7 in the Cuerpo 2 area among others);
• Sentinel: Most of the recent site preparations visible on Sentinel are not reported as being drilled, Holes 157/159 show how easy it is to miss drilling on Sentinel.
• NI43-101 for Cortadera may have more collar details. I was hoping there might be some though, if the skimming I did of the Productora 101 is any indication, these base details may not be present.

=============

From my comments at the last GM.

The last announcement did include assays at 0.2% Cut off. This is not likely to happen often (CE). Generally, there are 0.4% Cut off assays that overshadow the background halo where holes may be reported as NSA even if they have hundreds of metres at 0.2-0.3% Cu.

This quarterly continues to use the 0.2 cut off and is probably used for the base of significant result. Some other posters have commented about this change from the 0.4% cut off/significant results used previously.

Using a strict 0.4% for holes that are increasingly being drilled to test the marginal halos of the high grade core would likely mean that most would be reported as NSR or with thin intersections. Options? Use a different cut off for reporting??

IMO there is a reasonable chance HCH will get the El Fuego hub up and running in the next decade or so. Hopefully sooner. Even with the existing MRE's there would be decades of production that feeds the Python before it needs to come back for more and probably lower grade feed from the Halo mineralisation that time and technology may, or may not, become a much more tasty meal.