cdu vs sfr, page-64

As Sir Humphries replied to, "which unanswered questions, the answer being "The ones that haven't been asked"

Aside from that a meaningful answer is just not there to compare these two companies.

CDU is a long way from defining what is at Rocklands.

It is my belief that the market is pricing into SFR some unfound VMS lenses. For what SFR have found, yes, CDU is the better deal but the market I believe is factoring in further lenses as part of an overall situation.

As I said read up on VMS deposits. This is from memory and I am guessing. VMS deposits on average are approx 12 to 20 lenses in a cluster, with the second biggest I think 60% of the biggest with the reminder less than the first two. Thats a guess so go to Google and read up on VMS deposits. So if for example DeGrassie is the 3rd biggest then there are two much bigger to find and a lot smaller to find. Some of these VMS deposits are huge. So to attempt to compare SFR and CDU is a big mistake and could lead to people losing serious money and that is why this thread should be stopped.

We are upset at the constant refusal of the big end of town to accept what is at Rocklands. Understand that Cu equivalents is a FURFY. If as part of a Cu equivalent there is for example 0.3% copper, then it is probable that it is uneconomic to extract that copper. A more appropriate method of reporting is a spreadsheet with all metals listed in their own columns.

In the same manner we can critise the big end of town till the cows come home but the fact remains, that end of town has the best experts this country has available. They would not put the value on SFR without advise of the best knowledge there is. My bet is they are gambling on a lot more copper and to find that they have to find more lenses. That end of town is not stupid.

We are in the unfortunate position that someone in CDU is not being taken seriously, by that end of town and until some deep holes hit something really serious then we are going to be given the dunce hat treatment. I am a believer as is most on here but that is not enough.

WE believe we are seeing a big improvement in management at CDU and the forming of a very good management team, however going by the share price the overall market is not seeing that.

Take for example we are told the 2 metre centres drilling at Wilgar is for the Geologists to understand theGeology of Wilgar, in that two separate incidents are what caused the formation there. Now that is what we are told. We are also shown a digger preparing a pad to drill deep below Wilgar. So far no drill results deep below Wilgar.

We wonder if the company is paranoid about a TO and worry that this is influencing the flow of information to us.

Now take a different perspective and imagine a client in a respected brokers office who says something like "I have ten million to invest and I like what I have read about CDU" The broker kills himself laughing and pulls out a printed reports of CDU and says, "if you believe a company that drills at two metre centres you are off your cotton picking head. Look here (pointing to the Wilgar report) these drill holes and there are dozens of them are all drilled six feet apart. That bit of dirt is not much bigger than my back yard.

Now that sort of situation should not occur. It is situations like this, that show up lack of management education. There has not really been a very good explanation for the drilling at two metre centres. Most of us assume it is for good reasons. There is not a hell of a lot of volume in Wilgar, and yes for bedrock drilling it is really fantastic. You need to ask why it has not been drilled to depth as yet.

What we want to believe is Matt Healy wants to work out where the sweet spot is to drill. What we don't want to believe is the deep hole could be being delayed as, if it hits something really fabulous then the company could be subject to a TO and someone might lose his job.

Meanwhile the big end of town have laughing material and I don't think that is in anyones interest.