Pingfan, I don't normally like to rubbish individual posters, as...

Pingfan, I don't normally like to rubbish individual posters, as I like to encourage everyone's views. However, you have made a number of unsubstantiated comments in recent weeks, and you do yourself a disservice by doing so (and it's why you've had posts rejected). Please provide some detailed context and support to your comments, otherwise you are probably better off not posting anything at all.

Your response "Please read BUX's announcement 13 Jan 2014. You will get answer." is not what I would call substantiated and doesn't really support your argument. I have read that report, and note the following unedited comments from it:

"Buxton believes these to be the highest grade graphite drill intercepts reported in Australia"
"Additionally, initial petrographic studies show that significant portions of medium and coarse flake graphite occur in the samples. Observations show that graphite flakes generally range from 100 to 500 microns long and in some cases reach over 1mm in length"

Firstly, I will say that "highest grade" has nothing to do with flake distribution. In fact, if you talk to geologically minded people, there is often an inverse relationship between flake size and grade (i.e. the higher the grade, the lower the flake distribution, and vice versa). SYR possesses the currently largest known deposit with some of the highest grades, yet it's flake distribution means it's got lots and lots of the small flake stuff.

Secondly, the comment on observations of flake size are encouraging for BUX, but there is no hint there that they are even close to having the largest jumbo flake deposit in the world.

In addition, I have read the BUX graphite announcements on 5/8, 25/7, and 25/2. There is no detailed flake distribution analysis in any of them.

I agree with Duke. Stick to the facts, and don't make things up.