Based on their previous trading halts for this sort of...

Based on their previous trading halts for this sort of thing...MRE#2 from memory wasn't a trading halt and it wasn't a really huge upgrade..ie not a very material change. When MRE#3 came along, I was surprised they came out with a trading halt. But then in the trading halt announcement, they said it was "material" change, and low and behold, it was a humdinger...definitely material, so they justified the trading halt with a significant announcement.
So now with this one, they have come out with a trading halt, after working diligently on this and not making any significant announcements for about 3-4 months. Do people really think they would come out with a trading halt if the company didn't believe it was material good news? Of course with higher grade statements, there are less tonnes. So I'm guessing they may come out with a few different resource statements in this announcement. X tonnes at the highest improvement in high grade,, More Y tonnes at a medium improvement in high grade and W highest tonnes at the lowest improvement in high grade. Either way there will be pros and cons in mining and processing for each scenario (costs/mine dilution/metal recoveries), based on what the feed grades are and what metal prices are today or at a future date. But overall, I'd expect the overall message to be that they believe they can build a profitable mining operation, even at the lowest metal prices which we saw about a month ago, with only upside to come as the metal prices rebound and as they receive more testwork data. Let's see what happens.