If you all go and read the most recent Table 1 there are hints...

First 1668 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
DonnieDarko

56 Posts.

90

10/09/20

16:23

Post #: 47246020
Share

Originally posted by DonnieDarko: ↑

Lab certificates are on important thing to tick off the check list, but I think it's a convenient smoke screen, I am guessing they did the resource domains based on the logging work done by the previous mangers and AMC (assuming they are resource consultants on this also?) have done the preliminary magic numbers and it's not what they expected, so they are going back and tightening up the resource domains and this may have involved some re-logging (can take weeks) and in the MRE checklist that AMC have some additional checks maybe needed..Some of these can take weeks to rectify i.e bulk density samples were not taken, need some more duplicates core samples, perhaps there were no standards inserted or no 3rd party lab checks done? Those in industry with overseas experience will know what I am talking about, admitting to the market that you have these sorts of issues to resolve is too embarrassing. Let's not forget this was a discovery by a private Chilean company whom may not have been obliged to meet the same sorts of industry standards as HCH.

So lets assume Easterday F'd up the timeline, I am OK with the delay because I like the projects fundamentals and potential, the short term holders will be shitty because they want 30-50% SP increase on release to dump it. But for those in in this one for longer and an extra month isn't going to bother them if it's going to add significant value to the project. We should take some comfort that Steve Garwin is onboard and providing technical support to exploration and probably assisting with getting the MRE domains and geology right, perhaps he's come in and said we can do better guys, fix it.

Just my thoughts for what its worth,

Expand

If you all go and read the most recent Table 1 there are hints about the additional and on-going work for the MRE (refer below). 10% for the historical doesn't seem like enough to meet the bar. Typically (listed in western world) companies doing a Resource Drilling program will do ~20-25% this may typically include 5% Duplicate, 5% Blank, 5% Internal Lab standards, 5% CRM and 5% Umpire. I am guessing if they only had 10% then the might be pulling some pulps to do some more duplicates and a program of umpire sampling hence the delay. It should be noted that none of this really bothers me it's just a process to get through before we can get our MRE.

Most Recent Results Announcement Table 1.

"The lab specific methods used at the time of historical drilling are being assessed as
part of the Company’s forthcoming resource estimate"
"No formal assessment of SCM Carola standards, duplicates or umpire testing has
been undertaken. Although a high level assessment of all assays which includes
approximately 10% QAQC samples has been undertaken.
"No assessment of laboratories standards and practices has been undertaken for
historical drilling."
"The SCM Carola documents indicate that there has been some previous umpire sample
test work. Hot Chili has not quantitatively reviewed this data."

HCH Price at posting: 3.9¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
6 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply