This is a summary of the assay results to date for WC8 and yes I...

This is a summary of the assay results to date for WC8 and yes I went through all the results to date including todays result.

Assay results are available for about 170 holes and of those 62 had “No Significant Intercepts” ie NSI. That is 36% or over one-third of holes had no lithium present. That is a extremely high rate of holes that have failed to contain any lithium. What does that imply – in my view it seems the lithium is very patchy.

If we ignore the NSI holes the average width of each interval of lithium is about 22.5m with the weighted (by width) average grade of the holes with lithium is 0.88%. That is its not even 0.9% alone 1.0% and that excludes the 36% of holes with NSI.

While WC8 highlights the significant intercepts (see image below) one needs to go through the full detailed results buried in the announcements to understand why the weighted average grade is so low. Here is a summary by width and grade of the assay results for holes that are buried in the back of the announcements that everyone seems to ignore.

Posters who ignore the full WC8 results do at their peril. As I keep stating this is a low grade lithium deposit and will struggle to be economic and in the current low lithium environment will be uneconomic. With such a low grade it will be a high cost mine if it ever gets developed.

Its best to deal with all the facts not just those highlighted by the management and board. I still have trouble comprehending the very large number of holes with NSI.

Those with rose coloured glasses need to do some more research on companies with economic grades of lithium. BTW PLS has a grade of 1.15% (ie nearly a third higher grade) and is a much larger tenement than the very small WC8 tenement.

Where in Australia is their an operating lithium mine or one in development that has a grade less than 0.9%? I am all ears for an answer!