Thanks for your input. Respect your knowledge on the topic,...

Thanks for your input. Respect your knowledge on the topic, however many of your points are inaccurate/unsubstantiated (possibly related to your noted bias). I have inserted my commentary in blue for reference.

So the result they got was positive in terms of grade and it's distance away which makes the extension possible. The question is really about whether the grade are economical in between.
An 870m stepout is very significant, and hitting the highest grades so far is even more significant as it might point to the assumption stated in the announcement that "there is some evidence that grades of REE also increase away from the bauxite". Agree that further drilling is required, but this is a very positive from an exploration perspective.

If not you end up with little satellite deposits which doesn't do much to for economic extraction. Note the 3 yellow drill sites returned under 300ppm. If there is just a small area around that red hit which is good grades it doesn't really do much to bolster the resource size. Abx would almost need everything in this image hit 600-700ppm, it all be ionic and probably thicker intercepts to counteract the overburden.
As mentioned above, will likely pursue in-situ recovery and therefore overburden is irrelevant in terms of stripping.

I'll put this into context in terms of just how much extension you'd need to have a economically large enough deposit.
Look at the scale in the bottom right hand corner. Lets just be outrageous and suggest that everything in the image ABX will hit TREO.
Using that, you're looking at a 3500m x 3500m space. Now assume 2m's thickness and multiple by specific gravity of the host rock = 68mT @ best case 550ppm.
Presumptuous to assume 550ppm is "best case", considering that they are only at the start of their REE exploration, and per announcement: "ABx’s REE exploration has shown that REE extend for significant distances outside of the DL130 bauxite deposit and there is some evidence that grades of REE also increase away from the bauxite." Also, most of the highest grade hits (red circles on the diagram) are near the periphery of the the prior drilling, which supports the hypothesis that grades increase away from the bauxite.

1) There is slim to zero chance the full image will yield 2m's mineralisation across the tenement. This is indicated by the "too shallow" hits which IMO delineate the non extension of the clay mineralisation.
Disagree "too shallow" delineates the non extension of clay mineralisation.
Per announcement: "Most early holes were too shallow to test the REE horizon which is in clays sitting above the basement rock."
Ie. some historic holes were drilled too shallow to intersect the REE mineralisation!

2) The 68mT assumes that all portions of the entire image are ionic. Also unlikely, they have performed water soluble tests and proven a small portion of recovery. For context a true ionic clay can concentrate to around 900,000ppm in a salt solution. Post #:56059877 explains this more.
Agree, need to confirm ionic, but test work so far has been positive.

3) 2m's of mineralisation with 5-6m's of overburden will mean significant of mined/t to processed tonnes.
Irrelevant, if they are considering in-situ processing.

4) The grade if the resource extends probably will be lower than inside the current red zonation.
Presumptuous, considering the early stage of exploration and per announcement: "ABx’s REE exploration has shown that REE extend for significant distances outside of the DL130 bauxite deposit and there is some evidence that grades of REE also increase away from the bauxite."

5) If they drill into the source rock or bedrock, its very likely to be not ionic.
Per all announcements, they are targeting the clay mineralisation as the economic part of their project, not the source rock. Drilling into the "Possible Source Rock" on the diagram will be to understand if this is in fact the source of the REES to help guide further exploration.

6) If all the stars aligned, and you ended up with 60mT odd at that grade, feed rate or 10mT p/a it's toast in 6-7 years.
Presumptuous, considering the early stage of exploration which is open in practically all directions and also awaiting grant of a large exploration license: "We eagerly await the imminent granting of our large new Exploration License covering several attractive REE targets that exist east of our current Deep Leads discovery."

I am obviously biased in the sense that I do own an ionic clay project.
Agree, you certainly are biased to IXR which I like as a project, but the Uganda/Africa factor will likely see it trade at a significant discount.

And here's some unbiased factual commentary for a quick comparison.
-It's strip ratio (waste tonnes/processed tonnes is .76. this will be around 4. Irrelevant if In-situ processing used.
-Grade is 820ppm. this will be around 500-600 (Just my estimate on current hits. Presumptuous, too early to make such a call.
-Resource size proven to 315mT with exploration target of 500-750mT. This IMHO will be around 10-20mT un proven thus far. Presumptuous, considering early stage of exploration.
-Confirmed as ionic across the 315mT. This has no tangible evidence (yet) of being ionic. All signs so far point to it be ionic, but need confirmation.

Cheers
Maverick