Ann: Fifth Hole at Andover Continues to Impress, page-52

The orientation of the conductor is parallel with foliation, so it's remobilised (no news there; the company has identified it as such). To explain, we have to get off into the weeds of geophysics.

Conductive sulphides will conduct for a variety of reasons (different sulphide minerals have different conductivity, etc) but a key component is the connectivity of the sulphide mineral grains. Massive sulphide (>80%) and matrix or net-textured sulphide (>35%) where sulphide minerals > silicates, there's good opportunity to form a contiguous sheet of interconnected sulphide, which will "couple" with the EM. A long shear zone filled with a sheet of sulphide will light up, but disseminated sulphide (5-35%) may not. Or if it does, it's swamped by the response of the shear hosted sulphide.

SO, this is one reason why the VC7C and VC7D conductors lie parallel with the shear foliations; the shearing has smeared the sulphide out of it's normal position and formed it into a sheeted zone of ribbons and plates of sulphide within the shear zone.

One example of this is from Jubilee. Here, a larger body of disseminated mineralisation had less of an EM response than the massive and remobilised sulphides squeezed out the end. At Emily Ann, the sheet of sulphides dykes up to 750m off into the granites (and dragged giant chunks of ultramafic with it). Initially the EM conductors in the granites weren't drilled because why would you drill a possibly spurious conductor in granite?

Both of these exmples show how you need to consider a range of possibilities.

Can remobilised sulphides form ore? Yes, absolutely.
Will it be poddy? Absolutely.
Should you /wrists if they drop a hole in and it's a dud? Absolutely not.

I mean, Chalice shrugged off a disastrous looking set of sections where they're intimating Julimar is closed off by later granites at depth and it won't go to the Moho. But CHN hasn't run from 5c to a buck in 3 months.