Ann: Excellent Metallurgical Results - Greater Duchess Project, page-28

@AceRimmer my credibility is A-OK...my only reference to poor metallurgy was regarding Mount Hope 64182185 and guess which deposit was conveniently not included in these met results Cheers for twisting the truth...I'll give you credit, you fight dirty but you fight hard!

@Stylonnnn they received their first results from Mt Hope in July so they're not "just starting". Agree these are fantastic met results for ND/LF, but they're only a small piece of the puzzle and as @eastwest101 says they need "tonnes and grade" which are much more important, because if you don't have those it doesn't matter how good your met results are.
- ND best resources are deep and the strike length has petered out towards the south = doesn't look too attractive from the limited information they have released ie. refuse to provide a long-section?!
- LF limited strike and depth extent = limited tonnage
- Mt Hope - "strong oxidation" 150m+ depth = problematic metallurgy for open-pit mining + steeply dipping = not ideal geometry for open-pit mining: