I'm glad to see a level of sanity returning here after all the sullbhit that was being tossed around yesterday !
Yes there are some serious questions that need answers.
1. is this the last ann we can expect on assay results from current testing.
To me the ann seems a bit thin and doesn't stack up with the large numbers of samples purportedly being tested, therefore the hold up.
2. the suiting up of the technicians to complete testing
danman stated he worked at SGS and there was no suiting up required. Blood both on the phone to dollar and at the AGM stated that suiting up was needed. The results yesterday give no indication that protection would have been needed. I can't imagine a lab like SGS wouldn't do a preliminary risk assesment on samples received before testing to enable them to protect their employees.
3. .20 cents share price
for Blood to make a statement like that as a company position he must have more in mind than the results of the trenching assay result, that's a big claim to make and needs clarification as to how he intends that to occur.
4. a rock sample shown at the AGM claimed to be 100lb per ton
you don't go dragging along the best possible sample and make wild claims about it without having some sort of result to back it up, what are those facts ? More details are need on that point.
And that's just for a start
MKY
mky resources ltd
