bounce, page-40

Thanks jojo, I agree, they'll use the cobalt which will cut costs significantly. It all adds up and this is part of the attraction to sulphide mineralisation.

I've been mulling over this low grade thing, and I'm confident that DRK could be onto something.

The nature of disseminated sulphides is that it's wide spread mineralisation. I'd be surprised if the coming step out holes didn't also have disseminated sulphides of good widths.

We also now know there are pockets of high grade massive sulphides. This along with the copper and cobalt credits will help to possibly make this economical.

The wild card in all of this is the depth and width of a potential open pit mine. We are down to 200m so far and IMO are falling a bit short of anything economical. I do think though that drilling another 100m down would probably make all the difference, but is 300m too deep for an open pit mine?

I guess it then depends on how widespread the mineralisation is and as I said earlier, I believe the mineralisation will be wide spread, so hopefully we'll see a large open pit operation at some point. Still early days, I know, but you always need to be looking forward IMO.

Also 0.3% Nickel is absoulutely workable via simple flotation, with IMX Resources getting 69.1% recovery from Nickel and 82.3% recovery from Copper. And remember we have cobalt as well which is worth nearly twice as much as nickel per tonne.

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/imx-resources-reports-positive-flotation-results-disseminated-nickel-sulphide-mineralisation-tsx-ixr-1705642.htm

Do DRK and IMX share the exact same geology? Probably not, but IMO Dr Beeson is on the right track getting this tested for simple flotation recoveries and shows he too is thinking forward and thinking about a mine.