No the lab delays aren't this bad.If they hit anything decent...

No the lab delays aren't this bad.

If they hit anything decent you would have thought they'd be reporting (photos of drill spoil etc.) on visual Fe from logs and sample piles etc. If they had logged any decent Fe then Brockman would have headlined the bill of qtrly activities instead of them re-hashing Mt Mason and new rock chip samples. With the Yilgarn headlining the activities with relatively no work in the qtr, that says to me Brockman is a dud and they are preping the market for the next direction and focus the company will take.

The argument about drilling depths is specious reasoning as well. Holes that ended at 12m mean they were in the wrong place stratigraphically. Companies don't pay drillers huge mobilisation costs to only half drill something. Pilbara iron deposits are pretty easy to pick, everybody knows where the iron hosted units start and stop. The shallow holes indicate they either got nothing, or the mineralisation is too thin to be economic. From those depths I would conclude that possibly 4 holes (the holes >50m) intersected something, probably between 5 and 15m @ >50%, if the company is lucky. The small areal extent correct rock types on the tenement and the drill spacing from the program means there is little scope for untested mineralisation extents in other directions around where they drilled.

This is not downramping, I'm just calling it how I see it.