Ann: Major Copper Discovery Confirmed at Storm, page-370

What's your background? I am trying to find out where your cynicism has come from. What is a "pump" to a finance guy might be fact to a geologist or the opposite, an exploration geo with a career of no success can view everything negatively. Contextual understanding is key here.

How is it a pump if you have: 3 separate chalcocite ore bodies that are shallow and pittable (at a high level view). Now a large anomaly proven to host copper mineralisation, showing kilometre potential, with analogues across the tenure with the same signature as the proven exploration model, considered a pump?

Are pumps not 5m step out holes or drilling down dip?

If you had a proof on concept exploration model of success and consistent mineralisation would you not consider it a major discovery?

Or are you expecting 100m at 3% (true with 5m, whoops we drilled down dip)?

Please respond.