”Another strange point is for me that IVZ did not report any fluorecence in the mud or on the crushed cuttings when they drilled the 200 formation. One explanation could be that there is pure CH4 only.”
Another explanation, and to my mind the more likely, is that IVZ did not even test for flourescence. Surely if they did test and came up with nothing, this information would have been included in the announcement on 26/10, and also brought up by the MD in the subsequent zoom webinar. Scott does not strike me as the type of person who would conceal this type of information. Perhaps if you genuinely believe this you should address your concerns with ASIC?
Regarding your more recent post, where you write “I do not like this communication : some important parts of the puzzle are missing. The question is why.” - I’m not sure if you attended online investor briefing on 26/10, or the subsequent zoom webinar, or listened to the recordings, but I suggest you do, so you’re on the same page as everyone else in terms of the company released information you have available - hopefully this may stem the flow of the wild assumptions you’ve been prone to making recently.
IVZ Price at posting:
11.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
