Ok then we have progress, you have moved to stage 2 of HC grief and got angry. Moderating my posts and threatening me will not stop me making my point here, you have been added to my small pyramids list for future consideration. Yes, we certainly cater to a different audience, not even a different class but an entirely different school...
"I am again unable to Reply to specific posts, so in response to Post #: 74645034:"... like Russel Crowe said in Gladiator, "the frost, sometimes it makes the blade stick"... happens all the time here, just reply with @poster and the thread will follow what's it's about. Atleast you'll get a b lade up in defence
"Similarly, the size & consistency of Dante Reefs may render many opinions from 20+ years ago moot. The drill bit is the ultimate lie detector."... drill bit is the ultimate lie detector, you have a knack for shooting yourself in the foot with irony like nobody else I've ever met on HC. I'm very comfortable the historical facts, company communications and quotes from research papers will stand the test of drilling.
"they have 6 mill to throw at an exploration program over the next year.everyone knows it’s a bit of a gamble, it’s a penny stock. Why over analyse it?"... good question, usually. If you were paying attention, the salient point amongst all this posturing is that the "Reffs" targets are well understood geological phenomena, that "go on forever" to quote TL, or at least "for a very, very long way" (along strike and down dip). That geological continuity is a two-edged sword, because the forces that create very continuous and consistent magnetite reefs also create very consistent geochemical signatures... meaning very similar mineralogy and mineralisation within a tight cluster of natural, sampling and lab assay variation.
For that reason, TM1 will shortly come out with very large exploration targets from very little drilling. Who knows what range of possible multi-element grades they will aim for, but the statistical exercise of plotting the grade variance from the first drilling campaign is a simple exercise if book-ending the demonstrable Cu-PGE+ grade. My point is, why wait for them to prove it with $6M exploration over 6 months or whatever before considering the likely grade, thickness, tonnage, economics of the reefs as strongly indicated by historical and current drilling? Get ahead of the market and adjust one's probability based risk-reward judgement?
That style of valuation isn't for everybody... as we clearly see. Each to their own, but I don;t see the point of waiting for the chart to tell you you're wrong if you can get ahead of the game and trade accordingly?
TM1 Price at posting:
7.8¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
