Ann: Investor Presentation - RIU Gold Coast Resources Showcase, page-91

Valid points. People need to consider what the data is and isn't.

Probably the biggest issue is that generally across prospective targets, the vast majority of pegmatites are either poorly mineralised or not mineralised. That's why despite some recently fantastic lithium prices and in all likelihood thousands if not ten's of thousands of pegmatites being checked, only a few new deposits have been found. Normal is for pegmatites not to be lithium mineralised (or at least in the portion of the pegmatite checked). Normal is for pegmatites to have substantial dead zones in them so the reported assay widths are somewhat shorter than the pegmatite intercept width. Within Burmeister, TG6 has been confounding these normals. Non-mineralised pegmatite intercepts have been rare. Excepting weathered zones, low grades have been rare. The pegmatites have been mineralised all the way across so there isn't dead zone's. These are all unusual features. Good but unusual.

Again, I'm not a drilling expert and in this instance applying what would appear to be common sense. You are only going to get a dust halo that is visible from space under certain circumstances. If there is very low to no wind then there is no mechanism for the dust to travel away from the hole and it will settle in the immediate area much closer to the rig (white but no halo). If there are high winds, dust will be dispersed far and wide so that it becomes too thin and doesn't create a signature. If there are variable and shifty winds then the dispersion will be in all directions which is likely to be a sufficiently thin any layer its invisible. If there is rain, anything but a thicker dust layer will be washed away. I'd also note winds tend to be higher on ridges and exposed places (like Targets A & B). Typically from satellite snooping Delta's Yinnetharra drilling, if the hole is DD, while the drill pad is visible, there is no white halo. Big halo's are unusual even if intercepting stronger results.

Overall, its safe to assume some pegmatites have been hit. Their mineralisation status is unknown until TG6 has assay's back. Overall TG6 is doing exactly what they said they would - Start with Burmeister and Targets A/B and start the drilling in June. Both occurred. They also said they would report results ASAP and some short timeframes were suggested. I'd suggest they will be good to their word on that and report results ASAP.

It remains unclear if TG6 is paying extra for speedy assay's or has a trick up their sleave such as having some soils near the front of the queue that are being bumped back to the end and replaced with recent drill samples. Given their low cash spend, I'm guessing some sort of trick. If this is the case, how many samples have they got to bump. Could they have possibly been overly successful and have too many good assay samples for their shunted rock chips? Slow results are not necessarily bad results (although with other explorers that has been a pretty reliable rule!!)