Correct David....thats my point....we were told a 20m seam was previously below expectations just near Kingston. You missed the entire point, I will spell it out below for you.
(Not irrelevant if its Cracker where there was 0 seam thickness reported)
The question is around what are they looking for here when a 20m seam came up below expectations due to coal quality?
Why is the original the poster assuming Kingston has the goods. Their reasoning for their assumption is based purely on there now being additional holes proposed in close proximity to Kingston in the latest release.
However.....MY POINT....these holes are also in CLOSER proximity to Ugtaal. We were (as you posted) told that Ugtaal was below expectations.
So why the interest in this area again???
Ugtaal Stats - 43m net, 20m individual seam. (disclaimer for David the thicknesses above are not saying its good because of a thick coal seam but providing additional info on the area that we were previously told this was not good.)
If one assumes Kingston is good because of additional holes....why could another not assume results will be similar to Ugtaal as holes are infact closer to Ugtaal...and thetefore not so good.
"Below expectations" is not a failure. Coal is quite homogenous. What is not a commercial hole in Australia could be a commercial hole in Mongolia. Management have stated this. This is where I was assuming my post would lead you to.
We know there was a 20m seam at Ugtaal. We have been told it was below expectations(expectations at the time on first mongolian hole). The proposed holes show they are basically stepping a few holes each side out from previous Ugtaal. Ugtaal coals were in the 400m? depth range (shallow) target depth.
??? Are they testing how far these previously discovered 43m net(20m) seams extend.
Are they trying to determine for the area if the coal seams extend far enough to turn a single hole (ugtaal) that flows below expectation (non commercial in Australia) into many many shallow holes that combined can be commercial in Mongolia.
Image below again.
We were told the black dots were below expectations.
Question for all....
Why interest in this area again NOW around the previous "below expectation" holes when the PSC is so large?
