The quarterly offers the usual hope/dreams without anything concrete as per usual, probably why they released it after hours on a Friday evening.
As a general rule companies tend to announce poor things after hours on a Friday, while good news tends to be delivered in the mornings before the market opens.
So whats in this quarterly??
2nd line ....
"
New, strong EM conductors at West End highlight potential for significant mineralisation "
"
A combination of diamond and reverse-circulation (RC) drilling will continue into the June and September quarters."
That's nice and vague..
Going further there is mention of RC drilling around Investigators etc, though no details, then stuff about the new u-beaut EM conductors around West End, something
@SandyC has been wanting drilled. Then this, cause again there is no details of what's planned...
"
For further details of the new EM conductors, see our ASX Release dated 23 February 2022 Mt Alexander – Drilling and Development Update and ASX Release dated 29 March 2022 Exploration Update – Mt Alexander."
So I did go and have a look for details because St George never put details in the same announcement...
From the following I take it the first drilling is planned for West End from pg 6 of announcement 29/3/22.
"
The EM anomaly is modelled with conductivity of 22,800 Siemens, consistent with a massive sulphide signature, and will be prioritised for drill testing."
So again, even though it seems to be a priority, no details of how big this and the new EM conductor are. If it was a decent target, surely you would include that information?? So let's see if I can find out how big these targets are...
Going to the other announcement 23/2/22, ahh yes... finally found something about one of these conductors, but had to use the scale on the map as they didn't bother mentioning the size...
The 76,000 Siemens conductor identified from MAD204 is about 9m X 8m in size and about 500m underground, pretty much isolated by itself, no other EM conductors nearby except another tiny one identified down hole MAD202. These tiny pods will never be mined as they are too far away from anything else, and way too deep to sink shafts for minor mineralisation. IMHO a waste of shareholders funds if they do plan to drill this one. So exactly how is a pod that is isolated and 500m deep and only 9m X 8m in size meant to potentially host "significant mineralisation"??
Looking for info about the size of the conductor found off MAD205, I couldn't find anything about the size. Hole MAD205 is about 300m away from hole MAD204, so there is a large distance between these pods, which would make mining either of them not viable (assuming EM conductor down MAD205 was small like all the others).
The MAD205 DHEM conductor has a reading of 22,800 Siemens and is interpreted to be about 600m downhole. That's deep for drilling and very deep for mining, being a long distance away from anything else. IMHO it would have to be large to warrant drilling at all.
Remember the last hole to drill a target of around the same Siemens reading (MAD210.. 22,500 Siemens) came up with 25cm of massive sulphides with even the blebby and stringer sulphides over only 1.2m!!
How about some shareholders finding out from the company exactly how big this conductor is (as the 250m conductor tested by hole MAD205 came up with zip!!) and why are they bothering to drill such a small target given the depth (I assume if it was a large target they would be shouting it for all to hear!!)
They will never find decent targets by drilling tiny ones where they already have holes and DHEM that shows nothing decent nearby. 600m of diamond hole is very expensive to prove there is some minor mineralisation that will never be mined!!
Shareholders should already expect there to be minor mineralisation at all these minor pods, drilling them doesn't add anything, they need to find
large targets that are worth mining if they contain mineralisation. This constant drilling of minor targets is just wasting funds...
What the company has proven over time is that if they miss the EM conductor, they come up with nothing, even hitting some, like MAD205 come up dusters. IMHO the assumption should be that sans EM conductor equals no mineralisation, so where ever there is only minor sized conductors should be left and the funds used to try and find large conductors.
There are lots of minor pods of mineralisation strung out over a large distance and depth, but that's all there is. Proving up a few more minor isolated pods adds nothing, but at 500m and 600m deep costs a lot..
(20min delay)