I've seen quite a bit of regulatory confusion about pXRF...

I've seen quite a bit of regulatory confusion about pXRF results, basically, the ASX people don't understand the limitations and details of why some pXRF results are very accurate, and why other results are not.

Mostly people with legal and regulatory backgrounds and education in the ASX, rather than scientific qualifications, and thats why the ASX has made a balls-up of various different and contradictory statements about pXRF results. If the regulators are talking out their butts, and are inconsistent in their policies, application and interpretation of the rules, then the industry has no hope of complying all the time.

The technology is actually pretty well known and well understood, and there could be a standardized disclaimer of pXRF precision and accuracy in different sample mediums and sample homogeneity in Appendix 1 of most drill announcements. Once the industry starts to consistently do that, we might see the ASX regulators start to understand.

I will have to check if a company has done a pure pXRF trading halt and announcement before, in the right sample medium with the right instrument and the right calibration and in the typical % ranges for certain elements - pXRF is quite close to traditional assay results. The industry knows this, investors deserve to know this if they don't already and regulators need to keep themselves abreast of scientific developments in the resource industry otherwise they will be stuck in a regulatory time warp that is incompatible with reality.