Evening GeoFiji ...... when I saw your ? thrown in there, I...

Evening GeoFiji ...... when I saw your ? thrown in there, I thought it might just be prudent to chuck in a couple revelations to either substantiate, or, again question your uncertainty of it being Bornite (Cu5FeS4) containing ~63% Cu.

I feel from my years of petrographic studies, that it may not be Bornite.
1. Bornite, yes, it is often a constituent of secondary enrichment or as a contributor to supergene enrichment, but, in contact with the oxidised Malachite and Azurite? I feel a transition stage (zone) would have been conspicuous between the Oxides and your (?) Bornite. I do not see any transition on the contact between the two minerals.


2. From my experiences, Bornite is more closely associated with igneous magmas, appearing either as magmaticc segregations, or, as rather later deposits, connected with Pegmatities or end-stage consolidation. But, Bornite does form veins with Qtz, or with Qtz and Chalcopyrite.
3. Looking at the historic mined values of Cu within Mt Hope, surely (?) those percentages of Cu that were mined are too low to contain Bornite?

4. I would also be questioning the lack of "peacock" colours in the hand specimen that you revealed, unless of course, it was a very fresh and a non-tarnished specimen.
5. My thoughts are GeoFigi, that this is more likely to be Chalcocite (Cu2S = ~ 79% Cu). My understanding is, that Chalcocite is formed as the result of the alteration of Primary Copper Sulphides, eg, Chalcopyrite, (predominantly the Primary Cu Sulphide of this region), deposited into the zone of secondary enrichment through the assistance of meteoric waters, and descending waters.

Other than all of the above, I feel that there is a possibility that it is Chalcocite. Would'nt we both just love to get a PS (Polished Section) under reflected and cross nicol light using a good Zeiss at say 10X ! LOL

Very keen to hear your thoughts on this.

However, those historical Cu values in that insert above do not suggest Cu minerals of these values, very strange, in fact, odd to me. They are extremely low Cu values, perhaps suggesting the sparsity of these minerals that were historically mined.

My conclusion is, that this Mt Hope acquisition is not one that strikes me as being significant, not in the short term anyhow. Sorry to say that for all the hopefuls on HC that say colours tell a wonderful story and of buried riches.

What one sees on the surface, is not always reflected as to what one may find at depth, otherwise we would not need drilling rigs. :-(

The deal by CNB was sort of "reasonable", a very small area (1000m X 500m) it is, yes a Mining Title, and the Vendors shares issued with 12 months Escrow. What a steal for the Vendors ! Just watch them closely at exactly 12 month from the contract date, might tell you something.

Unfortunately, CNB in their DD (Due Diligence) were probably unable to throw just one IP line across the title, that would have revealed a $1M Cash & 1M Share Issue as to it's potential value. But, just from my years of experience in carrying out these similar assessments.

GLTAH ..... Time will tell. :-