"If the junior explorer market is a magic show of illusion and make believe, then DRE would be David Copperfield... a master of the art." I said "if", so unless you actually believe it is a magic show then it's hyperbole. The market resembles a casino if anything.
I firmly believe the junior explorer market is highly tactical and strategic in what, when and how they release results and commentary with it. I believe that the importance of good results are exaggerated, bad results and risks are held back or hidden, company diagrams are manipulated, knowledgeable players will understand or work out reality, and of course the true state of affairs good or bad will leak into the share price. Thats not just with DRE as I've made abundantly clear before, that's just the game being played and if you don;t understand it then you are being played...
Usually the spin is within reasonable expectations, no damage done so long as you understand there is more going on than meets the eye. Sometimes it crosses over into foul play. I have never dobbed in anybody to the ASX or cared less beyond calling it how I see it, especially when communication is below what I consider acceptable standards. I can go through my list for DRE later if you like, but to stay on topic I want to question the niobium release and implications in more detail in no particular order of significance.
GCC Detailed Gravity Survey.
No explanation of the 100m x 100m detailed gravity survey completed 12 months ago, originally slated for release Nov’23, on which was predicated the GSWA $180k handout to target deeper parts of the GCC. No information on the survey, who conducted it, who interpreted it, the colour scale or any other explanation with last Thursday's release. Surely the gravity was modelled by a geophysicist, what was the interp for the southern 5km extension under cover?
Without a colour scale its fair to assume the gravity image was coloured to maximise the contrast where they want it to show target lows. Fine, but why fill the GCC shape with red to make the carbonatite appear more homogenous... like the interp is correct and oh so obvious?
The red fill is most obvious in the NW corner where the GCC boundary outlined overlaps with the grey gap in gravity survey coverage over HAS tenements. It makes me suspicious when a company can;t just put up the data image accurately to speak for itself, and feels the need to apply thick make-up for a better looking complexion? I wonder what that southern 5km of interp carb actually looks like without red filter giving it a lift compared to the rest of the carb drilled that is clearly a gravity high and clear on the magnetics? You may say that's fine, I say that's needlessly misleading...
No results ever release of 8 diamond holes into the C3 MRE drilled over 12 months ago, but now they appear with niobium assays (only). A number of those diamond holes twinned (or very close to) early RC holes, including CBDD005 on CBRC086, CBDD009 on CBRC125, and CBDD010 (NSR) on CBRC115. That’s double counting ‘significant intersections’… realistically there are only 8 collars with >0.3% Nb2O5. CBRC115 @ 0.36% but diamond twin NSR, CBDD002 with 6m @ 0.4% near surface, and CBRC084 with 9m @ 0.32% Nb2O5 and CBRC089 with 12m @ o.3% Nb2O5, which leaves a paltry 4 decent drill thickness near or >1% Nb2O5 holes within 80mx80m drilled C3 MRE area…(C3 holes highlighted yellow)
There they be highlighted in plan... a rectangle not much more than 200m x 100m,
Below I overlaid the C3 'high grade' area (cough) on WA1 Luni for scale just to give you an idea what DRE need to find size wise...
Barbie is on, I'll get back with my mineralogical grizzles after dinner...
(20min delay)