The JORC Code is working as it should but neither Gary nor Hohnen understand it.
The requirement that Gary appears to be railing against is that completion of Table 1 Section 1 (Exploration Results) requires that meaningful commentary is made regarding sampling controls. Even if it were stated that there were no sampling controls (ya know, QAQC) - and it looks like there weren't none, Your Honour - then it'd still comply with the Code, provided that it was endorsed by a Competent Person. It's not hard, children.
From what I understand, the ASX has for some years accepted that the Elazac Process (whatever it may be) is an industrial process. Fair enough. However, mineral sampling falls under the JORC Code. Compliant reporting will include transparent and material descriptions of the samples taken, how they were taken, why they are considered to be representative (ideally including geostatistical support) and sufficient QAQC to support the results. I bain't seen none of that, M'Lud.
At the very least, that would remove the confusing, multifont, multicoloured numerical pastiche that confronts investors in each Quarterly and is the subject of a great deal of mirth in the industry. Every four months, I see Quarterlies forwarded around the traps with "WTF" in the subject line. I cringe when I admit to being a long-term shareholder. . .
HAO Price at posting:
23.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
