Quick Question, page-21

If you go through my posts you'll see I am the first saying we need to drill this to identify a measured and indicated resource, as against inferred, within the JORC code as that will maximise takeover price. I have also said we might not get there because we could be taken out by then. I have also said back in August before this concept started been floated around, that I suspect we have a two mine theory here, been a mine around hole one 1 and 2 and hole 7, and a need for tin/tantulum credits to be proved up between holes 3-6 to join the two mines together into one - again maximising sales price.

Now my previous post was built on the assumption of having sufficient reserves for a mine. If have that the type of development scenario possibility we also help sales price given transport costs but power issues to be reolved. The other point in the post is if tin/tantulum credits important to development scenarios, assuming have a goer here, I would suspect one of the takeover entities would need to have experience in tin/tantulum hence why I am floating a consortium idea of takeover/development.

All IMO and for one I don't ramp on this forum whether I hold or don't as shown in my posting history. Not proving up the resource to a measured/indicated resource in line with the JORC code means at an inferred stage the takeover price will be less than what some are floating here (i..e I have said constantly no more than 20c - 25c) but if can get to a measured/indicated resource through drilling it will be a price higher than that - the question is will AVZ be able to do that before takeover and if do get to drill then my previous post has also relevance in a future takeover price scenario.

All IMO