Ann: High Grade Sulphide Copper-Nickel Potential At Stark, page-6

Just starting to do some basic research on this one, at the moment it looks like Stark is an extremely vertical and quite skinny assortment of deep thin high grade intercepts, I don't know why they are bothering reporting the Ni grades down at 0.02% to 0.2% Ni - as they say - my grandma's rose garden has better nickel grades......

I am also wondering what is the exploration history of Stark, and why all the drilling is so deep and not much older shallow drilling appearing in the cross sections, sort of looks like they are shooting for the moon before they even understand the geometry and distribution of the ore body at shallower depths? Maybe its just their choice of drill sections. I appears to me that the Stark mineralization may be a fairly recent discovery judging by the fact that its still open up dip and along strike. When they brought Stark off HRZ they even noted how under drilled Stark was near the surface so why no fast cheap shallow drilling to chase it along strike?

The Stark drill core itself does looks good - should be a massive conductor, so why the lack of detail about what sort of geophysics they are going to use? Surely any electrical method at surface, should be worth a shot seeing as they have some thin but sulphide rich zones to work with? And whats this about no more drilling until 2021 - thats a sure fire way of telling potential investors to go away and come back again next year....

Nanadie Well resource statement - the tonnes and grades - on first look the copper grades seem too low to justify development - even with a cheap leach operation of oxides these never make much money. How can they have such a decent bunch of sulphide drill intercepts at Nanadie Well on that plan and come up with such a huge low grade resource? Oh - I see, they've used a ridiculous low cut-off grade of 0.1% Cu. What a great way to hide a decent little medium grade Cu Au deposit from potential investors.

The only thing that I am really liking so far is the Hollandaire prospect itself - resource statement upgraded tonnes and contained metal and is all open-pittable but missing that crucial ingredient - an existing mill/treatment option, so they will need to construct a heap leach SX-EW plant right? At only 3Mt of ore they seem to need more tonnes to put through whatever treatment plant they build over a longer mine life to overcome the capital hurdle. Might be worth doing some more exploration to find other/additional Cu SX-EW treatable orebodies nearby. Is it just the low number of tonnes and the cheaper cost of construction that has led to the decision to use heap-leach SX-EW treatment as opposed to a traditional sulphide flotation plant? From what I have seen of the resources - most of them are sulphide copper resources so why the attraction to SX-EW? And how are they going to get around high power prices for the Electrowinning part of the process? Hope they have the pyrite issue figured out for any potential SX-EW options as well.

Obviously I need to do more research to answer these questions, but a bit of a head scratcher, obviously a fair way from any production so it looks like more a matter of the geology team either having a massive discovery or leveraging their known orebodies to find some sort of "secret sauce" techniques that improve their chances of making many more discoveries, once you drill and discover enough orebodies (and the bigger and higher grade the better) then the funding and construction of treatment plants usually falls into place logically based on whats been discovered. The one thing I really don't like about Hollandaire is the complete abscence of copper and gold at surface with all the metals gone from surface down to 20-30m depth, that means all the traditional surface geochemical exploration techniques are ineffective, which is a massive drawback, as they will have to resort to aircore drilling, geological mapping and geophysics to find more 'Hollandaires'.