Anything is possible of course Bruham with BTDDs 11, 12 and 13 as the company decided not to release any information about them except some basic info re DD11 in the 19 Oct ann and the scant data in the AGM Preso about the 3 of them. Who knows as to why, when and what? - apart from the geos and drillers and the Board members.
However, the market knows more about CCDD7, but nothing about visuals.
We know though that:
$ It was drilled because of what was seen in CC3.
$ CC3 ended in mineralisation at 303.6ms and that what the assays revealed prompted the MD to say:
CCDD003 is the most significant hole so far from our maiden Cockie Creek program. The 248-metre interval of the main mineralised zone, with the hole terminating within mineralisation, is indicative of a potential game-changer for the prospect.$ It was drilled to a depth of 725.7ms.
$ It had the same dip as CC3 ie -70.
$ Its azimuth was 331, just 4 degrees different from CC3's azimuth of 327 but probably of importance.
$ It was drilled 18 metres to the east of CC7 and 66ms to its south.
Therefore, it looked very targeted. I will be disappointed if it does not yield plentiful mineralisation, but it is of course possible that it did not hit anything of significance, and so prompting the move to Bottletree immediately thereafter. However, if this is what you are thinking Bruham, it does not accord with what the MD said in the 16 Oct ann:
“The work ahead of us now is to interpret all of the geological information contained in the core together with the assay results as they are received from the labs. This will enable the development of a mineralisation system model to vector the next holes towards the core of the system, which potentially could be located close to the current levels of drilling. We are aiming to continue the drilling towards the end of the year.”Here are the collars etc of all CC's 7 holes.
View attachment 5860246
