Banter and general comments, page-42

@westy9 nice to see you contributing here. Its good to have opinions from all sides and not just an echo-chamber in here so feel free to keep posting your opinions to balance out the discussion

I am of the opinion that it's still early days, and a bit of a 'wait and see' kind of a thing. I genuinely see potential here for something significant but nothing is without risk ofcourse. You've gotta calculate the risk vs reward and then place your bets from that perspective.

Personally i think the early results do appear to be very encouraging but as i said its still early days. One of the risks are the grades at depth and whether they'll match the outcropping grades or not. I previously mentioned that they've hit 1.5%+ at 300m depth so that's given me a bit of optimism that there could be high grades at depth. Those results are below

assayed at 7.2m @ 1.51% Li2O with an internal high grade zone of 3.1m @ 1.87% Li2O

Again this doesn't mean other hits at depth will also be high grades. Its just a bit of encouragement that there could be high grades at depth

I'm going to quote you on this: "Yes, if you can’t see spodumene in the core then that sample is not going to be economic. For a 1% Li2O grade, the sample needs to be at least 12.5% spodumene. You are able to see that amount of spod in the core."

So based on your statement, you're saying that the areas where there are visual spodumene identified in the core, those lengths are 100% high grade and economical? That's pretty much what your statement means when you look at it from the other side.

So potentially we're looking at receiving one of the assays with ~30m @ over 1% - if so, i think thats a good start. It would have definitely been better to have visual spod throughout the entire core but im not going to complain given these are the first 4 holes

Something interesting to point out: Discussion with WVJ he thinks that its possible that they haven't even hit the AP12 pegmatite at all. He thinks its entirely possible that these pegs are different ones (Possibly AP11 and another pegmatite further south). There could be some really complex structural/fault movements going on.


Another observation:


If you look at this cross section and read the announcement, you'll see that hole ANDD0202ext was re-entered and extended by 121.0m.
Due to that, they hit the pegmatite further below which was a 31.7m-wide pegmatite with visual spod.

Hole 204 and 203 stopped before they could enter that peg. I am expecting them to re-enter holes 204 + 203 and extend them the same as they did with 202. Those yellow lines i drew should be the extension and then they will also likely hit those pegmatites and possible continued visual spod

Those results should be in addition to the next holes results, that's what im thinking anyway.