Good man Grundle.. See how I’m keeping you around ;-) Yes, I...

Good man Grundle.. See how I’m keeping you around ;-)

Yes, I have prepared what errs on the side of best case scenario in the ST time frames allocated, I would usually add contingency however given the format is in its infancy and timeframes are not (IMO) obscure or completely unrealistic, I’ll wait for a more info form the Co before refining durations/targets. I have adjusted Pebas slightly tho based on your input, however based on a couple of other factors – read on...

I do recall reading about those drilling issues, and distinctly remember 'rig issues' at Serra - getting another contractor etc. I do have my suspicions re; rig/access issues at Serra, when they are coupled with a duster. Call me a cynic; but when results are going to be good, nothing stops the news flow. I believe half of what they (anyone) say, and base the other half on what they do.

Serra ANN 7.7.17: The three drill holes on this section, which were drilled first for ease of access, have intersected……… then, in the same ANN when explaining the ‘delays’; Many of the logistical and land access issues experienced early in the campaign have also been resolved

WRT time frames for assays, from the same CTM ANN 7th July 2017: Laboratory turnaround time is currently at around 3 weeks.

I suggest lab turnaround time during wet season would be on the better side of 3 weeks, I input four (4) weeks to give a few days to interpret/tabulate and prepare a release, this is also a small contingency. As a general note to anyone, the ‘days’ (duration) in the program are business days..

On the Pebas drilling duration and Assays; yes, I do have a ‘best case scenario..’ however that reflects past behaviour.. When drilling Serra, they sent assays from DH01 and 50% of DH02 straight to the lab. They did not hold them on-site prior and batch send.. I see them drilling that initial hole into Pebas and having assays returned ASAP (with a HH XRF scan in between) – while drilling continues and assays are progressively received and reported.. I haven’t allowed for the entirety of the drilling program, because I don’t know what it entails.. I show one (1) headline hole, with assays returned in a typical timeframe. Serra was approx. seven (7) weeks from ANN drilling commences to reporting initial results. 1.5 holes, issues and greater depth..

Pebas has drifted, in the last investor presso (Feb 18) it slates commencement of drilling into Pebas as Q2 2018 – so with that, the likely promise that Itapitanga will prove up, and your comments I’ve shifted it back just a little, but not too far because:

$200K on Aurora will be determined by other factors. Namely: Centaurus has secured a 100% interest in the title of the Itapitanga tenement. Under the Agreement, Centaurus will pay the private Brazilian vendor up to R$150,000 (~A$60,000) over a period of six months and commit to undertake R$150,000 of exploration work on the ground over this same 6‐month period. At the end of the option period and on the basis that Centaurus wishes to continue with the project, it will pay the vendor R$500,000 (~A$200,000). If it decides not to continue with the project it will transfer title back to the vendor with any exploration data collected over the 6‐month period.

So, the amount payable should they continue is exactly the same as what is required to be expended on Aurora – and the time frames align. We have to be done, resource defined and willing to push on by August (being the expiration of the option period), so call it July… So we do have (limited) time to switch to Aurora for the Nov deadline – if we feel we need to.. Pebas would presumably have influence over that expenditure also..