Ann: Rock Chip Sampling of Turner Confirms High Grade CID Target, page-113

Mate, your whole post is flawed based on uneducated BS. Anyone can throw in calculations like you have because more people than you know are stupid.
You are going on a strike, width and depth from rock samples. Gimme a break. Puh-lease.
WTH are you talking about. Your numbers mean nothing.

You can have 100 rock samples in the area you are are using in your calculations, based on the area that the company did a few rock samples were found to contain Fe. It can be 80% Fe. Sure, it's exciting but it's a 1 in 100 chance of hitting pay dirt.

As I said close to $100 million market cap on rock sample analysis from one company and then making the results better with another company is a bit strange but let's leave it at that.

Have you looked at the rock sampling on the mapping? Does that look consistent to you?

"Due to the limited number of samples, only lab standards were utilised for analysis purposes. Further systematic sampling is planned which will incorporate rigorous QAQC protocols."

"Samples were taken on irregular spacing due to the nature of sporadic mineralised exposures observed."

It's not really DSO quality. It's rubbish. Only 9 rock samples out of 40 were above 60 and below 69. Once you're in the 50's it's "good bye jacky". My understanding is that hematite is at the minimum high 60's to 70. Magnetite 72% +. Not many rock samples in any of those ranges. How many?

One last thing Mt @Heisenberg63 LOL, until you drill extensive holes, and it will be a lot, likely much more than 100 (which probably costs $100,000 per hole (minimum) using RC drilling your back of the envelope calculations cannot predict the volume.

What was the cost to extract that iron ore - I forgot what you said. Ha ha.

Good luck with your tatts ticket.