Ann: GeoPhysical Survey Indicates Large Cu-Au Porphyry System, page-8

0.012 (or 1.20 over 100) & 1.23% are roughly the same value sir.. Give or take the .03%

It's just that I was on the fly and through some abridged values out there as an example in order to estimate possibly in ground value of not 1, or 2, but 3 porphyry plumes.

Cubic metres * SG of the host lithology give total tons of ore which when processed should return the g/t or % value less recovery losses. (I use 2.5 as an av so as not to over cook things estimation wise).

And as I said the SG of Chalcopyrite is listed as 4.1-4.3 (which boosts tonnage for every cubic metre of dirt moved by a fair margin) but again you don't want to overcook things.

Now I'd love to think the prospect stays above the 1% average & fully diluted value as that makes for compelling metrics and hence I didn't tweak the Cu % value down by much at all ergo the 1.2% (or 0.012 decimal point value)

Top 100m is a different concession so that comes off the vertical value for determining cubic metres and if the good Dr is correct the depth of the thing may well be near double the 600m vertical hole depth AAU are shooting for this time round. Basically the point is to ascertain is the near discovery worth more than current MC, discounted for all potential risk (95%) and if so, then by how much?

Market id giving the listing nothing for what they are sitting on, how much longer that remains the status quo is yet to be seen.

But the porphyry is real & therefore sooner or later (all things being equal) the SP will respond in turn...

Been there and done it before & don't see this as any different based on all that is known at this point in time.

IMO of course :-0

H8tey