Has anyone noticed something. For this hole 2 they have not...

Has anyone noticed something. For this hole 2 they have not shown the pXRF results for spot analyses of the sulphide cbebs/veins, as opposed to showing pXRF results for Hole 1. Little wionder why. To show a spot, discrete assay using pXRF on blebs then indicating these visual blebs are within some intersected core length of "x" metres can easily, almost certainly, have led some if not many to the conclusion that the reported %Cu values in the blebs apply to the intersected intervals. Whereas in fact the core visuals show most of the core within those intersected intervals in the photos is barren rock. Averaged out and looking at the visual % of the sulphide blebs you would be lucky to get 0.3 % copper average.

Stating mineralization is IOGC style means diddly squat until drill core starts showing more than current narrow veins/blebs of mostly pyrite/chalcopyrite with some smattering of bornite/cjacocite. Need at least to get net-textured copper sulphides with some intervals of semi-massive sulphide to have any confidence or hope this could turn out to be a decent deposit. Plenty of IOGC style deposits around that are just veined systems and uneconomic. Need those intersections showing much higher volume fractions of (copper) sulphides to justify the share price having wings. Maybe Mr Market woke up to this realization this morning? Not to say there may be better grades deeper down but diamond drilling is unlikely to resume for a while. Am out and may return once the dust settles.