Yeah I have redone what I wrote as I messed it up.The resource...

Yeah I have redone what I wrote as I messed it up.

The resource actually would of come a lot closer if they weren't conservative but they are going to be conservative since the inferred resource was completed with radiometric data (spectrometer readings).

The inferred resource that they calculated came to 59.3 million pounds. Now this inferred resource is the one that has been calculated with the radiometric data (Spectrometer).

They came to conclusion the inferred resource was an average of 197 ppm..but the actual indicated resource which was calculated with chemical assays came to 234 ppm. now that is more like the grades we are looking at.

The indicated resource is 12.9 million pounds.

12.9 + 59.3 = 72.2 million pounds (revised resource size)

NOW one must remember this statement in the announcement.

"Coffey also re-calibrated the radiometric data based upon a statistical study by firstly reducing values by 30 to 40ppm and then applying a factor of 0.85 to the result."

Okay so we can work it out..if 30 to 40 ppm reductions have been made to the radiometric data which has been used for the inferred resource we can work out a more realistic average ppm once it is calculated via the chemical assays.

Lets say we add 35 ppm onto that average 197ppm. that would be a more realistic average grade for this!

that is a 232 ppm average which sounds right.

136,400,000 tonnes x .232 = 31,700 tonnes of uranium which equals roughly 70 million pounds.

Coffee also applied a factor of 0.85 to the result. Lets remove this and we get 82.3 million pounds

82.3 million pounds (Newly calculated indicated resource) + 12.9 million pounds (Existing indicated resource) = 95.2 million pounds indicated which will be confirmed once all the chemical assays arrive.

So in conclusion Bannerman are sitting on roughly 95 million pounds indicated resource with an average grade of roughly 233 ppm once the chemical assays come through and this is Excellent IMO.