Hey mate, agree with you here that 300m x 250m is definitely misleading. I was curious of the markets reaction to hole 8 as it was more of an 'infill' hole which confirmed mineralisation between holes 2 & 7(surface distance of approx. 160m). Interception at depth of the higher grade cupola was expected as this hole more or less intercepted hole 2 at about 160-170m where hole 2 reported ~1.3 g/t. The unexpected result was the higher grade zone from surface which is always good. It looks like this news was the catalyst to start the re-rate of LCL as it seems it was fairly undervalued.
Onto some modelling to show why 300m x 250m is misleading:
This angle shows it best(looking N-NW). All of the 1g/t+ intercepts have been along a relatively flat plane approx 65 m wide(and even thinner at depth).
Then across approx 175m length, again thinner at depth.
More accurate dimensions are 65m x 175m based on current results which gives an area of 11,375m2 compared to 75,000m2. Pretty significant difference when computing volume to estimate resource size. A hole or two further down cutting the porphyry on the western side seems like the next logical step to define this.
Seeing that the approach to Miraflores is an underground mine, is there any concern that Tesorito won't be amenable to open pit mining? As unless the grades increase further down, it looks like underground mining may not be an option grade-wise for Tesorito. Any thoughts?
