IPT mentioned a CHN comparison at a recent conference. While IPT...

IPT mentioned a CHN comparison at a recent conference. While IPT oscillates in a holding pattern around its current SP, I was pondering a weekend thought to pass the time, about what an initial assay result might look like, how the pattern of the next 3 or 4 assay results after that might impact on the SP, and then reflecting on that, how the share holders’ interpretations of those assay lengths might be more easily understood, particularly when it comes to the decision-making zone when results get announced…

There aren’t many easy comparisons in the PGE space…

CHN first hole: 19m at 2.59% nickel, 1.04% copper, 8.37g/t palladium 1.11g/t platinum from 48m.

IPT hole RHD012: 3.5m at 2.9% nickel, 2.3% copper, 144 g/t palladium, 5 g/t platinum from 67m. *

IPT hole PSD02: 0.6 m at 7.4 % nickel, 7.6 % copper, 25.6g/t palladium, 11.5g/t platinum from 57m. **

* (plus 6 g/t gold & 14.5 g/t silver)

** (plus 2g/t osmium, 1.7g/t iridium, 1.4g/t gold, 1.3g/t rhodium & 0.8g/t ruthenium)

So, I’m deliberately presenting a vastly over-simplified model to initiate that discussion, and hope to flesh out the more nuanced approaches a little later on…

For Broken Hill, lumping all the deposits into the one generic type, and defining a very loose ‘average’ of those exceptional PM grades into a category called ‘the good stuff’:

What are the assay lengths required to move the share price needle by a significant amount, in comparison to moving the needle by an exceptional amount? It seems like it could be simple, but is it?

I’m not interested at all in responses that it can’t be done; the margin of error is too high; there are too many dependent variables; there’s a whole bunch of extraneous parameters that are unknown; that it’s not verifiable; that it’s not statistically valid; that it’s not possible. Thanks, I know that shit already - it’s accepted as part of the premise. I’m interested in demystifying the numbers and the geotech-speak, and exploring whether it can be done, and in simple terms, what those numbers might look like. i.e. Is there a relative gauge that is useful for a quick reference guide…

For example:

0-10m of the ‘good stuff’: won’t really move the needle appreciably in any lasting way, and a probable significant re-trace in SP…

10-30m of the ‘good stuff’: a short term spike, and then a settling back of SP…

30-100m of the 'good stuff': will move the needle appreciably …?

100-200m of the 'good stuff': ?

200m-500m of the 'good stuff': ?

Feedback on your well-considered thoughts is appreciated.

As investors who have better information tend to be better reassured in moments of high emotion, and usually don’t panic and make those very regrettable, wrong decisions.

So my thoughts are running along the lines of what zone of intercept lengths are going to enable IPT to be recognised as having ‘discovered’ a major mineralisation find, with a lasting re-rate in the SP.

Thoughts,

Ice