ok, I'll bite.The announcement from 08 Jul 20 was based on...

ok, I'll bite.

The announcement from 08 Jul 20 was based on historical sampling - i.e. it was a review of records - here's the headline:

"Review of historic data identifies several advanced gold prospects at Adelaide River Gold Project located 25km south of flagship Finniss Lithium Project in the Northern Territory"

Now, If we look at the competent person statement:
"The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results and Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Stephen Biggins (BSc(Hons)Geol, MBA)" So, the first announcement was driven from the MD.

Now lets look at what happened to the SP the few days prior:
01 Jul 20 - Close 4.4c
02 Jul 20 - Close 4.5c
03 Jul 20 - Close 4.6c
06 Jul 20 - Close 4.6c
07 Jul 20 - Close 4.7c
08 Jul 20 - Announcement about gold - close 5.2c

The announcement today was based on surface sampling from gold assays - not historical analysis. Headline:
"Gold assays up to 106.5g/t in rock chips at newly defined Covidicus West Prospect" - yes the name is dumb.

Let's have a look at the competent person statement:

"The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Dr David Rawlings (BSc(Hons)Geol, PhD)"

DrRawlings is the exploration manager and at a very different level to the MD. Now if the company observed an uptick in the SP prior to historical analysis handled by the MD, they must have been alert to the fact that if an announcement was being compiled by sources lower in the company that there could have been much more buying prior to the announcement. As I said in my last post, I was surprised by the TH - partly because there wasn't any significant SP action before hand.

It is possible that management were actually being professional - as soon as they were told that they have visuals on gold, they placed the company in a trading halt to provide time to compile the announcement and to prevent the SP being influenced – exactly what they are supposed to do. Maybe they learnt from the last one.

Disclaimer – I don’t work for CXO, but I do call a spade a spade when I see it – even if that means I don’t participate in bashing management this time. Not saying I am right, but the above argument is a possible explanation.