Correct me if I'm wrong.... the anomaly at Churchill is probably not just crustal thickness because it is localized and because the first drill hole showed that there is a compositional reason .... at least iron oxide, hopefully more.
RT is suggesting that if the 2nd hole shows more of the same, the sp will rise 20-60%.
It seems to me that given the reason the anomaly IS compositional, the result for Hole 2 has to be either more massive, or closer to the surface compared to hole 1. There is clearly a positive gravity anomaly gradient between the first hole and the second.
Why would this not be the case? For what reason can it be a worse result than the first hole???
VMS Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)