Ann: Quarterly Activities Report and Appendix 5B, page-55

So far, one of the key attributes at TG6 has been the pegmatites have been mineralised all the way through. That's pretty rare.

GL1 put out some assay's and cross sections and from that you can see the issues of partial mineralisation.
MRC0467 went through 8 peg's but only 7m @ 1.03% and 2m @ 1.03% made the grade to be reported. The other 6 peg's weren't mineralised.
MRC0468 went through 4 peg's and 3 made the grade to be reported although none broke 1%. The 2nd peg was around 40% of the width of pegmatite intersected. The 2nd intersection was perhaps a 3rd of the pegmatite width. Non-mineralisation/partial mineralisation turned what could have been ~60m+ of intercepts at possibly good grades into 22m of lower grade intercepts.

If this feature of strong mineralisation of pegmatites Burmeister continues (it may not), a pegmatite that swells could far more easily give a monster hit. While the share price disagrees, it could be that TG6 has hit a thicker high grade patch and doesn't want to announce it until they have all the assay's aligned. Rechecking high grade intercept is destroying their timeline. TG6 aren't worried because they know they have a strong announcement coming, however if this is the case, WTF don't they do a TH pending assay's?