I feel sorry for holders here.I wrote about my concerns with...

I feel sorry for holders here.

I wrote about my concerns with this stock in May and early June last year and was roundly criticised on the forum, so stopped posting my thoughts.

Turns out I was very close to the mark.

The rock chip samples looked geat but the drilling of course now tells a whole new story.
I was told be a friend in the Mn industry that "this style of Mn is common in the west Pilbara. It is more of a weathering process/dispersion rather than insitu mineralisation. A so call sweating of Mn that looks great at surface but is only skin deep."

What really red flagged it was the logs having their descriptions changed;

For example the logs on 3rd May 2010 showed hole CSRC0026 to be Shale with MN between 0 -12m. Then on the 5th May the announcement listed the same hole as a 12m interval of MN.
Did the Shale suddenly turned into MN over the 2 days?!

How many tonnes of ore will they now need to find for this project to go ahead...60MT or 70MT?
Say your infrastructure setup cost is $500m, you will need at least 20MT just to cover that. Assuming an operating cost of $100t. The ore at 30% upgrade sells for $240t but you need to mine 6x the tonnage for the beneficiation.

I think people have just figured this out and after seeing the assay results (which don't lie) reality has hit home.