Ann: New Results Boost Growth at Costa Fuego, page-21

IMO this is a better presented announcement. Initially skimmed the announcement but didn't go to the bottom where there are diagrams of most of the various holes reported are put into plan or section contexts.

The Mett holes at Productora need to be looked at in the context of previous drilling. They were drilled to get samples from zones that had been drilled before so the grades shouldn't come as much of a surprise. What may be surprising, in a good way, is that the grades and intersections are perhaps a little higher and longer than expected. Still they are within existing pit shells and may not add too much to what is already known except, perhaps, up dip.


Similar section for hole 25 is in the announcement. For 25 the variation is in line with expectations that subtle differences in hole design are likely to give differences that will impact previous modelling. How much will need much more study than is possible from available data in the announcement but doesn't look like it will change section for #25 much.

For Hole 28 it appears similar with possibly confirmation that depth extensions below the pit design are real and represent future targets.

On Google earth the number of early holes shows the results are to be expected.

blb

=================
SZ - probably poor results unless there is some geochem vector at play.

Disappointing as a lot of hope was given to the geochem anomalies here. The geology seems to be more complex than thought and there is possibly a lack of near surface intrusives that are more likely to host mineralisation either directly or in halos.
Detail detail. Large area still to be tested though somewhat downgraded(??) with data obtained by the drilling to be fed back into the modelling by SG and co.

3D geochem modelling has not yielded obvious success at SZ or Prod.

=====================
Valentina and SA - chugging along as useful potential small satellite operation to the main plays at Cort and Prod.

The main focus of posters, and announcements, tends to be on high grades and thicker intercepts. Mineral deposits are the combination of all results and much detail work. The NSR results in this table from the quarterly need to be viewed in context. Work I haven't done and won't, for the time being, on my laptop only.


===========
Cortadera and Productora are IMO good resources.

Management here may not be the best but not many copper projects are doing much better at the moment.
Cascabel? QB2? Nueva Union? and many many more Including
OZL (kalkaroo), RXM and CVV in Oz that are perhaps lower grade than HCH's.

Not an easy environment to get an expensive project off the ground without a fairy godmother(father) or two. Glencore? Hmmm...