In my view some one needs to take some of the statements in their announcements with a grain of salt.
Let me illustrate . The images below from both assay announcements states true widths of pegmatites of 132m and over 130m.
If you look through all the holes with the pegmatite widths there are only 2 pegs over 100m as set out in the images below being holes 23 and 89. Assays for these two holes are set out in the images below - I have included the cross section of hole 89 below.
Guess what, they could not measure the TW’s of the assays in these two holes and the cross - section image below tells you the reason - it’s because the hole was drilled straight through the guts of the pegmatite. If they cannot measure the TW of the assays then they cannot measure the TW of the pegmatite. So if they are right about the 132m true width of the pegmatite where is the evidence as to date they have not supplied it.
In conclusion they have either not supplied the evidence for the statements of TW’s of over 130m and 132m or they have misinterpreted the information provided or they are just telling porkies. It does not matter which option is correct as they all reflect poorly on the company and it’s a red flag to me. It’s one thing to hype up results in announcements (all stocks do to a certain extent) and bury the real situation in the detail but it’s on another level when they announcements either state information that is not correct and therefore misleading or they do not supply the evidence.
(20min delay)