Ann: St George Boosts Funding for Exploration, page-92

Thank you for your 41212938 post ezirida. Your figure is correct and from memory it incorporated the entire resource of Nova and Bollinger. i.e. the Ni, Cu, and accessories. That, also from memory, was for a total of less than 275,000 tonne of Ni equivalent and valued at the time, as you pointed out, for $1.8 B. Noting that the then metal prices; were almost on par to today’s prices.

Also, of note is that the Nova/Bollinger ore bodies are almost 1.2 km. apart in what appears to be the same laccolith and maybe separated by a pinch out of the mineralisation where a possible feeder source separates the ore bodies. And whilst there are other scattered EM anomalies in the “EYE” structure which hosts Nova/Bollinger, I don’t know whether IGO have applied an aggressive programme to explore them in recent times. (I put that by way of background info for those who don’t know NOVA – here is a link. http://www.newexco.com/discoveries/nova-massive-nickel-sulphide-deposit/)

On the other hand, we know that at the central part of the Cathedrals belt there are 3 mineralised prospects close to surface that are suspended in a shallow plunging mafic/ultramafic intrusive that is open at depth and that whose source has as yet, to my knowledge, not yet been located by geophysics. The 3 prospects -Viz a Viz - Investigators, Stricklands, Cathedrals. are separated, but extend over a strike distance of nearly 5 km. We do not know either what the structural controls or the architecture of these mineralized zones have in relation to their hosting rocks with depth.

We do know however, as averagejoe2013 pointed out in his 41215891 post and as you agree with him in your post # 41216472, Argonaut estimated between 50K and 100K tonne of a potential resource constituting these shallow seated intersections. I agree with you and with SandyC and Meteor and Paavfc and many others who have posed the questions, what is below these surface indications?

We have encouraging evidence that mineralisation is present at depth in one or two holes that fathomed deeper penetrations and that the geophysical surveys downhole; show the presence of more anomalism peripheral and even deeper than the depths reached by the drill. Why wouldn’t they be related to economic mineralisation??

But, even if not, the shallow back of the envelope resource suggested by Argonaut, is about a fifth to one quarter of Nova/Bollinger at the time of the Sirius takeover. SGQ have another 5 or more prospects along the Cathedrals Belt to check, of which 2 to 3 if not all could contain shallow resources of the size if not slightly bigger than Argonaut’s estimation.

I suspect that would easily give SGQ the required figures to release an ultimate JORC, of a size comparable to the Sirius takeover figure.

Yes, I hear what is said and what is implied regarding difficulties in mining such disjointed occurrences or pockets of mineralisation. I think if the commodity’s price and shape is right, a method for mining it will be found.

Nothing in nature is predictable without facts, but at times hints and indications can prove factual with enough work, especially in this game. That is what makes it exciting. I think we have had enough indications to allow us the poetic license to speculate along the above hypotheses.

I’ll be a monkey’s uncle if such speculation hasn’t crossed management’s thinking. And I know that my nieces and nephews are not monkeys. I on the other hand am retired and as such I am allowed to speculate on what I think may be possible. Sooner or later, I suspect someone will shoot me out of the water, but that will probably make for good discussion.

Cheers and best wishes to all patient ones.

Helmenesh