I'm not a geologist but I have a good grasp on figures. Whilst I...

I'm not a geologist but I have a good grasp on figures. Whilst I am happy with the announced hole intercepts and grades I am not happy with the newly revised silver equiv cumulative true widths and the cumulative true thickness zones. The high grade holes MRN23005, MRN23014A, & MRN23013 have been downgraded from over 3000 g/t silver equiv cumulative true width to below 1500 g/t silver equiv cumulative true width and MRN23008 has increased from less than 1500 to greater than 2500.

Not to mention the cumulative true thickness zones have changed significantly over the last two announcements (8 days). From a laymans observation this last hole seems to have detrimentally downgraded the geological interpretation of the upper level of the SSZ potentially effecting project start up economics. It appears that the thicker ore zones commence 150M lower than originally predicted.

The question I have is how does one hole materially change the geological interpretation so significantly. The high grade holes mentioned at the start of this post have been downgraded because the estimated true width of the area was up until today estimated to be greater than 40m but has as of today the true widths have been revised to 5m-10m. That is a massive change.

Noosa Mining Presentation 16 November 2023


MARONAN Announcement 12 December 2023



Maronan Announcement December 20 2023