Time for a bit of aperspective on the likely assay result....

Time for a bit of aperspective on the likely assay result. Firstly I'm not downramping , simply making comment on the the preliminary core logging detail given to us so far from their commentary, depth data and the core visuals. The conclusions I draw from that are as follows. The interval of copper mineralization is stated to be about 50m, commencing from 797 metres . For the most part the copper mineralization is stated to be chalcopyrite. Looking at the visuals given to us as reasonably representative ( see the core tray tagged as 837m) the yellowish banded phase is the chalcopyrite and I would estimate over that core tray its present at say around 5% volume fraction, give or take. As chalcopyrite has a 35% copper content, 5% of this is 1.7%, or lets just say a bit under 2% copper averaged out across the core. They then state that whilst there are some indications of bornite over the full 50m of mineralized core, its only pervasive in the last several metres before the core shows strong silicification and a photo is shown of the pervasive bornite at 843 m ( definitely its the peacock blue coloured phase, but also maybe also that grey-blue phase also there on the right) . Several metres does not sound to me like 10 metres or such like, otherwise it would have been defined in the narrative. Instead I take their “several metres” to mean perhaps say 2 -3 metres. Bornite has a 63% copper content and from the pervasive bornite core photo I estimate there to be say 25-30% bornite volume fraction, so that would give us about 20% copper over lets say that 3 metres. Okay, totalling it all up we have over the 50 metres about 47 metres of 2% copper ( at best I reckon) and 3 metres of 20% copper which averages out over the full 50 metres as 3% copper.
The impression I am gettingfrom the share price is that people may think the whole 50 metres of mineralization is going to assay with a very significant copper content. Not going to happen. Although 3% copper is not bad ( if it was only at a few hundred metres depth) And to this end, look at the comment made in the announcement stating that “regardless of the assay” we appear to have a large IOGC system. In other words, what I read into that is the assay results may not be quite what many are expecting.

I did hold, sold out on the run-up , will now wait for the assays, if the share price then retreats somewhat due to over-anticipation, I’ll likely buy back in.