Ann: Assays Received and Exploration Update, page-66

The main difference is proposed open-cut (Julimar) vs underground (CB). Higher costs associated with underground mining and therefore must mine at a higher cut-off. The lowest grade underground nickel mine in Oz is Savannah (PAN) at ~1.5%. Wider zones of mineralisation here plus it is a restart of the operation so they already have decline/processing plant etc, so can justify mining at this lower grade. Bulk of capital costs already sunk. There was an underground Ni mine in Tas (Avebury) with a ~1.1% Ni grade. Barely even got started and ended up on care and maintenance.

Sure, ESR have been successful at intersecting sulfides over significant strike length and dip extent, but it continues to be narrow and marginal grade. It is clearly a big mineral system though and there may well be a sweet spot in there.

Need >2% over at least a few metres TRUE WIDTH. These specs required to cover mining costs, counteract grade reduction due to dilution & recovery, trucking & toll-treating costs; and leave enough contained value that you can still turn a profit. Then you can start thinking about underground mining.

With respect to 330Mt @ 0.16% nickel, 0.1% copper at Julimar. Fantasy to think that this is mineable. These grades are probably less than some tailings deposits in the Kambalda-Kalgoorlie area. Again, perhaps there are discrete domains that are higher grade but they have gone for sheer bulk in the maiden resource and the grade has suffered.