BrassTacks - I haven't read what you are responding to but if...

BrassTacks - I haven't read what you are responding to but if someone is calling either the latest or all the exploration results from Grammer "poor", then that is just self-evidently silly. Poor is a relative term and to convert it to a numeric scale of say 5, most people would say it reflects 1 out of 5.

Combining all of: the depth to mineralisation, prospective strike length, average XRF grade and true widths, it's obvious we are running somewhere between a Zone 5 standard and the standard of the 3 associated deposits (5N, Zeta NE, Mango NE). To call that "poor" is daft.