Vector, once again, we really appreciate yourcomments. It’s good to have someone sticking up for management and HC worksbetter as a forum for exchange of views when this happens.
However, we still can’t buy into your defenceof the PEA.
Walford Creek had a JORC resource of 48mt at1.42% Cu Eq when acquired. At the time the ASX ann (18/6/14) quoted HamishCollins as saying his goals were to expand the resource to over 75mt andcomplete a pre-feasibility study by Dec 2015”.
Thenon 6/3/15 the company announced a new resource of 73mt @ 1.43% Cu Eq.
Significantly, the contained metals increased by:
113kt of Copper to 296kt
213kt of Zinc to 623kt
235kt of Lead to 626kt
35kt of Cobalt to 60kt
25Moz of Silver to 55Moz
This was no small tonnage resource (as you argue in defense of the PEA) and we continue to view the PEA (which wasn't done until 2017) as very poor indeed with grossly excessive costs (which wrongly and inexcusably rendered the resource uneconomic).
We had both grade and tonnage so there really is no excuse for what was done.
However, keen followers might have noticed some other very strange management activity/reporting which has continued to present date.
We went from 73mt @ 1.43% Cu Eq (ASX 6/3/2015) to 37.4mt @ 1.53% Eq (ASX 25/2/2019) and this 'new' 37.4mt resource was announced as a "Walford Creek Resource Upgrade". How could this be a resource upgrade? Moreover, this is after something like 40,000m of additional drilling in the interim.
AND according to the report for the AGM (ASX 12/11/18) the contained metals had somehow decreased between 2015 and 2018:
6/3/15 12/11/18
Copper 296kt Copper 224kt
Zinc 623kt Zinc 315kt
Lead 626kt Lead 306kt
Cobalt 60kt Cobalt 44kt
Silver 55Moz Silver 30Moz
Perhaps someone might explain what's going on?
One theory doing the rounds is that after stuffing up the economics of the PEA so badly, 'smoke and mirrors' have been used to try to restage the resource. Somehow, we seem to have lost significant tonnage of each contained metal?
Where has it gone? We have repeatedly asked management/the Board for an explanation but they refuse to answer?
Again, where is OCP on this very important integrity issue?
