Yeah, maybe,maybe not Tin. While AUS goldies are doing okay, why...

Yeah, maybe,maybe not Tin.

While AUS goldies are doing okay, why spend money on a maybe as opposed to a " given " ?, vis-vis the mineral sand permits we have.

I give management some kudos for the mineral sands permits, because we all know, its cheap exploration and cheap production ( in relative terms ) compared with gold exploration.
So why go down an unnecessary path?

From a report some years ago;

Due to the technical difficulties associated with drilling through 400m of unconsolidated cover,the potential costs of the drill programme may be quite high.
Consequently Anglo American is seeking funding under the Collaborative Drilling Initiative from the Queensland Department of Mines and Energy to help test the new exploration concept identified at the Saxby Project in NW Queensland. If Anglo American’s funding proposal is successful, the
company plans to use the Smart Mining funding to drill two 900m deep diamond drill holes to test two separate EMconductors for potential massive sulphide mineralisation.

https://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/239255/saxby-project-proposal.pdf

Question do they know something we dont?, or like blackadder," just as jerry wont expect us going over the top for the seventeenth time in a row " , drilling in this tricky area now will provide a different outcome ?.

If it came to a vote, I would prefer the mineral sands projects over the gold, but as I am a WA resident, I could be termed biased.

The Ionic news was rather interesting, I may need to email Simon for some clarification.

I saw a UK Graphene ink stock @ .17 Pence, would that be circa .50 cents AUS?


Raider