Looking at the table for the 2017 MRE that is included in this...

Looking at the table for the 2017 MRE that is included in this quarterlyreport, I notice that resources that were deemed to be 'potential open cut’ in2017 had a cut off grade of 0.5 g/t while resources deemed 'potential underground’ used 1.7 g/t as a cut-off grade which seems quite high and must haveexcluded a lot of the orebody?

Perhaps this is why they have been turning Minyari-WACA into a “Swisscheese” as was commented? If the infill drilling gives greater confidence in the 'potential underground' orebody it might enable them to include a lot of lower grade material left out in 2017?

i.e., using a less demanding cut-off grade than 1.7 g/t must initself bring in a lot more of the orebody and thereby increase the quantity of gold, before any new discoveries or additionalresource are included.

Or am I misreading this?

I notice that the recent GGP RNS used two cut off levels, 0.2 g/t forlower grade material but 1 g/t for the higher grade intercepts headlined intheir report – and they are one heck of a lot deeper than we are.

Of course that is a drilling report and not an MRE, they used an NSRapproach (rather than cut-off grades) in their last MRE update so it isdifficult to make comparisons, but it does suggest that they consider 1 g/t to be potentially viable at 1.5kms deep.

In 2017 the average price of gold seems to have been about $1,260/oz, Iwould imagine that AZY might use say $1,600 this time which should help us along as well as it increases the viability of lower grade material

Feeling a bit more optimistic about this MRE but dyor of course