Further to one of my posts from a few days ago some further...

Further to one of my posts from a few days ago some further observations below and contrast it to BGL.

In the December MRE update for NN, 74% was in the indicated category which is quite high compared to BGL at 53% (see details on BGL later in this post). As usual the devil is in the detail.

I noticed in the first image below from the recent MRE update that up to RL 350 most of the resource is in the indicated category (probably over 95%) and even at RL 400-450 at least 80% is indicated with lower proportions in the indicated category for RL 500 and deeper which I assume is due to lower density drilling. Up to RL 450 probably about 90% or more is in the indicated category and that may increase as they do more in-fill drilling.

Based on drilling up to RL400, from further in-fill drilling, we may see over 95% of the resource in the indicated category up to RL 550 or 600 by mid-2024. We may even end up with 95% indicated up to RL 750 we with more drilling.

Does such a high proportion of indicated (90% or more) bode well for a lot of the indicated resource to be converted into the ore reserve mid-2024 and for the ore reserve to be a high proportion of the total MRE? Someone with more knowledge can probably answer this question.

The NN ore body seems a lot more straightforward than the BGL deposits and I assume easier to mine. Does that imply a lot of the indicated resource will be converted to a reserve? Anyone with comments?

The comparison with BGL above with further details below suggests that NN is a significantly higher quality deposit by which I mean much higher proportion indicated resources and a more straightforward deposit to mine. Does this also imply it will be easier to mine and cost less to mine?

What might we expect from NN by mid-2024? Well my guess is a resource of at least 1.25m Oz or maybe even up to 1.5m Oz with over 1m Oz maybe more, in the indicated category. If my guess is right that will not be far off BGL's indicated resources and with a lot less drilling than BGL has undertaken.

And on top is NN deeps and the directional drilling to come.

Its unclear if the same can will eventuate for Gilbeys (see second image below) - maybe its too early to tell from drilling to date and they probably need to do more in-fill drilling.




BGL have undertaken heaps of drilling in contrast to SPR for their 3.1m Oz resource. The last resource and reserves update (May 2022) shows that only 53% or 1.65m Oz of the total resource is in the indicated category with the rest or 1.46m Oz inferred. Of interest is that 1.34m Oz is in the reserve and to reach the 1.85m Oz for the LOM production the rest, or 0.51m Oz comes from inferred resources not indicated. I am puzzled why the rest of the indicated of 0.3m Oz has not been converted to a reserve while they rely on the inferred for the LOM 1.85m Oz planned production. Any views welcome.

BGL's indicated resource is spread across a lot of deposits (5-6). The May 2022 announcement stated that 42km of drilling from September 2021 grew the indicated resource from 1.4m Oz to 1.7m Oz, total resource went up by 0.1m Oz and reserve went up from 1.04m Oz to 1.34m Oz. Compared to NN a lot of drilling for a relatively small increase in reserve and indicated resources.