Hi Jdubya,I dont see anywhere in the latest release (or any)...

Hi Jdubya,

I dont see anywhere in the latest release (or any) where ASRA has claimed an Ionic Clay resource exists. The mention of ionic clay in this announcement simply states they have "the same chemistry" although doesnt go into any details about what the very particular chemical analysis they are using as a metric is and its importantance. The graph they use there is also a log graph. If you take a proper look and replot it linearly, its very underwhelming. I see this presentation as a bandaid to prevent further haemorrhaging of market cap innthe short-term. There is nothing new here IMO. What is absent is of the most interest to me. The company had commissioned metallurgical studies in order to define exactly what kind of deposit it is and how leachable it is. A study that was supposedly underway in June last year with result due by October. This study was meant be THE KEY to understanding what they have and how profitable it is. Every subsequent announcement has said results due soon or words to the effect, constantly moving the deadline goalpost... until now. Now, no mention whatsoever. @DavidW we had an exchange on this topic a while back where you rebutted my comments (that there was no evidence for or against that the study was going well or likely to obtain a favourable outcome) with "there is plenty of evidence from remarks by Prof Collerson which economists can extrapolate upon by way of preliminary estimation due to the scale, depth and deposit type which points to cheaper extraction".
Given the chairman's announcement earlier in the year stated they had been "mislead" regarding the Metallurgical study and timelines and now that the latest announcement doesn't even acknowledge the study's existence, do you still feel the same? The question is not at all tongue in cheek, genuine interest in ur answer
the scale, depth and deposit type which points to cheaper extraction". Given the chairman's announcement earlier in the year stated they had been "mislead" regarding the Metallurgical study and timelines and now that the latest announcement doesn't even acknowledge the study's existence, do you still feel the same? The question is not at all tongue in cheek, genuine interest in ur answer