Look at the tables in the appendices. I get your point....

Look at the tables in the appendices. I get your point. Expectations need to be managed. This shouldn't be a direct comparison.

Look at an early drill result from CMM below, you don't have 1m of 60g/t, but you have more width with lower grades. The consistency down hole is greater, meaning, as you process the dirt, there's a lot of specks throughout. Focus on where they say "(Includes)". Compare these to AAR. It's not a hopeless situation for AAR. There's certainly something there, but at this stage not comparable with CCM. CCM results read to me like a mini Gruyere. AAR reads to me like a mini CCM.