Thought some of the more genuine people might be interested in my thoughts on this one given recent results...
I will not be replying to anyone, so please do not take offense.
lol...and as for the all you stalkers, go for it...show your hands, I dare you!
Cheers!
Posted several days ago on TopStocks...
---1
More to this situation than simple dismissal as a "con job"...exploration is much a more complex process than that.
As evidenced in today's announcement...and indeed in previous ones, I have yet to see any indication of reporting of anything other than facts.
Seems they have a fairly complex system at play here...one that may or may not be economic, but certainly not one with the same potential upside it had after the first 2 drill lines confirmed what looked like a continous trend in correlation with the mag anomaly.
It has become apparent from additional drilling that it may be more of a poddy resource, with barren, although still "anomalous" zones right along the magnetic target, which is clearly picking up the peridotite intrusion, along with hornfelsing as malluded to in the previous announcement, punctuated with potentially high grade mineralised zones coincident with the recently discovered IP and VTEM anomalies.
This still could be representative of the roof of a deeper Porphyry...but far too early to say given the mixed results to date.
Given results from holes 01 and 02, it seems likely the IP and VTEM surveys have delineated at least one and possibly three potentially economic zones, each between 150-250, long.
There is no doubt recent results have downgraded the immediate potential of this resource...but...the IP and VTEM surveys are encouraging in that they have provided three distinctive target zones for them to concentrate on.
High side, assuming the a portion of each of the IP anomalies are economic (200m + 200m + 100m) we get a combined mineralised zone of say 500m of strike from the new target zones...
500m (strike) x 30 (width) x 250m (depth) x 3.5 (sg) = 13,125,000 tonnes.
Assume average 3.5g/t pgm's gives us approximately 1.5m ounces.
With a higher Platinum ratio as appears to be the case, we can assume $600 per ounce PGM value to give us a potential high side in-ground in-situ resource value of $886m
Converted to AUD$ = AUD$1.1b
A lot less than the high-sides we were looking at earlier...and with real doubts now about the nature of this find, the market is likely to assume a lower percentage of in-situ value.
With 64m shares on issue and say 2% of in-situ value, we get 34c per share for the Thunder bay asset...a bit misleading perhaps, because what they have found to date upgrades the entire tenement and in particular the large intense mag low yet to be drilled, looking all the world like a decent Pophyry target now.
Then we have Tib Lake in Canada and of course their Australian assets; East Yilgarn (Ni-Cu...86,000@2%Ni), East Kimberly ([email protected]%Cu &1.8%Zn)...and about $3m cash.
All in all, whilst recent latest results have not pleased, the current price does seem to be oversold...especially in light of the fact that the current hole is likely to provide good results given previous correlations with mineralisation withing the IP and VTEM anomalies.
Could be a nice bounce ahead if the results are good as expected.
Cheers!
---2
It doesn't bother me that it (hole 06) is between the two dud holes, as the coincident VTEM and IP anomalies are the targets...not the dead space in between.
Initially it was hopes the magnetic anomaly would prove mineralised along it's entire length...in fact this is the case, but not at sufficent grades or widths to be economic.
The IP survey should principally define areas of massive sulphide mineralization, whereas the VTEM predominantly picks up changes to conductivty, such as that given off by sulphides...both I think up to 300m depth.
Hole 06 is the only one where the two surveys seem to have picked up something in the same location, possibly suggesting a stronger response and potentially richer, wider, deeper zone than the others drilled to date.
Interestingly, hole 01 had very little if any VTEM response and only shows an IP outline and the drawings provided. This appears to have been intersected at reasonable depth, where sulphides are generally more representative of the norm. Hole 2 on the other hand, although also drilled into an IP target with no VTEM response (same as hole 1), effectively overshot the IP zone of interest, suggesting the mineralisation intersected was shallow and potentially not a true representation of the actual sulphide grades at depth?
Can't be sure of course.
Anyway, Hole's 3 anf 4 were essentially misses, neither of which were coincident with the survey targets.
This is where hole 6 becomes interesting...it is the only one drilling a target that has been picked up with both IP and VTEM...and of course magnetics from the original survey...as such, I am expecting (hoping) for something interesting from here.
We may well find the sell-off, as dramatic and perhaps overdone as it was, may well have been facilitated in the knowledge a decent bounce will come...especially in light of the fact they may already be in the mineralised zone already.
The drillers might be seeing stuff in the core long before an announcement gets out.
No reason to buy of course...but perhaps one not to sell out at firesale prices?
Cheers!
MMB Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
