Ann: Market Update - Delay in Assay Results, page-211

MB.
I have already given my cents worth on the ‘flagship’ interval.
A best interval of 7m of sulphide mineralisation over ~55m (can’t remember how deep it started think it was about 80m?).
Now out of those 7m, 4 of these had massive to semi massive sulphides which ‘may’ contain pent/pyrho and chalc.

This is the 1st of the Miki drill holes.

Like I mentioned… between 2-6% Cu/Ni over 4m
They can try and smear that over the 50m Saying 0.1% Ni and 0.2% Cu… which is rubbish if they do, tell it how it is right.

Cascata?
Pods of sulphides with chalc.
Not an abundance and not much to chase.
I see this quite a bit where I work.
Layers of sulphide which under an extensional environment create boudinage effects.
Possibly worth chasing a source but this seems like smoke to me and I find the report on Cascata waves a red flag for me.

Sorketap has magnetite with disseminated sulphides. Just for your information, they will not be mining this for the iron.
Nor will FMG want any part of this for iron ore.

Now of these projects, two are looking ok.
They haven’t found anything of economic value yet.
This is why it’s called mineralisation and they are not ‘ore bodies’ as you have referred them.

I feel your TAJ is now a ‘corporate geologist who is looking for funding to explore an area of personal interest. I am not going to be fooled by the results or the hype.

Sad.