@Luca21 I liked your post... short, to the point, tongue in cheek and I had to look up epistemologically rationalistic. Across various posts I've substantiated HAS of misleading, deceptive and apparently fraudulent releases to stitch up shareholders and keep their own dream alive. Other than sucker punching brokers for CR of the year 2022, those clowns are underwater over $50M borrowed from Twiggy to buy NEO Performance shares with a 12%pa compounding con-note due in just over 2 years time... the crazy things desperate people do hey.
@salpetie "See if you can find a mine in carbonatite with ore (sensu stricto) at 0.5% or less anywhere in the world. Haven't heard of one offhand. Grades in the 0.1-0.5% TREO range are probably just background in many carbonatites."... pretty much, though I wonder at your misleading and deceptive table of RE projects. If I didn;t think better of you, I'd say you purposely mixed up the grades of clay hosted deposits, high value HREE deposits, and multi-element deposits with only two carbonatite deposits to falsely flatter C3+
Browns range and Nolans are not Carbs but skinny vein-breccia deposits of quite different genesis. TREO grades must be read in conjunction with basket value and extraction costs to have any comp relevance, so why did you exclude all the global carbonatite hosted deposits to compare C3 except Cummins (which has a more relevant 6Mt @ 2% TREO HG core)? Picturing C3 1% TREO standing next to pygmies is flattering, but as a geo you should know that scale reference is important.
@silvertri but I am "looking after No.1" as well as trying to save the unwashed masses. I’m reminded at Easter my role will always be distrusted and persecuted. Persecution of the misunderstood, especially those who’s motives are not obvious, is a long human tradition. Crucifying different beliefs as insurrection, burning healers as witches... it's my cross to bear.
Though I enjoy research, sharing it and testing my judgement against consensus, don’t mistake that for a wasted investment time. What I learn following DRE is leveraged across the RE industry and others. How I analyse DRE is leveraged from other projects, and so on. My ability to quickly and accurately judge exploration results improves with time and knowledge. Ignorance and ideology are financially a lot more painful crosses to carry than mine… “Knowledge is power. Information is liberating. Education is the premise of progress” Kofi Annan.
@kduvey "the 1% ‘supergene’ stuff on the surface may be economic" ... "will be classified as a resource in the next estimation (which implies better than not chances of being economic"... "it’s just way to early to compare c3 results to peers and use that to make assumptions on economics of a project."... "c3 economics will depend entirely on what is found in the other carbonates and those holes aren’t even bloody drilled yet."... "In my view the c3 results are neither bad nor good."... "sometimes with this much uncertainty, it’s just not even worth attempting to make any sort of definitive proclamations of economic viability." What a load of unsubstantiated erroneous drivel.
Of course economic viability is judged by the market and reflected int he share price... from the very beginning right through every results release to that final DFS report. Some people do economic valuations better than others, most make an optimistic thumb suck, some don;t do anything at all. From what you've written on DRE so far, I put you firmly in the latter.. I've seen nothing substantive except waffle from you, here's a challenge if you're up to it. Explain the economic implications of this HAS operating cost table for Gifford Ck carbonatite hosted oxide deposits.... it's illuminating.
