@Rotichan ...." I think JP is playing a game and holding off on any JORC hoping to hit something large to add value to what can possibly already be commercially viable to mine. "
Please think logically..
Firstly there are the rules of continuous disclosure, so you are suggesting the company is deliberately with holding material information, despite stating existing drilling didn't warrant a JORC resource..
Secondly, the last 2 cap raises would have been made at an artificially low price, therefore diluting existing shareholders more than necessary if there was enough for a commercially viable mine.
Playing a game, by holding off is clearly detrimental to existing holders, yet you suggest the company is doing this (and against listing rules and regulations) . Now have you done the trig on the holes in the Stricklands 'deposit' to work out what is or is not there??
I prefer to believe what the company states, even though hidden away late in the announcements...
"The completed drilling at the Project is not sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity to support the definition of Mineral Resource and Reserves and the classifications applied under the 2012 JORC code"
Remember they did the 'resource drillout' last year but never released the results. Surely if the results were outstanding, they had a duty to release them before going to market to raise capital?? They didn't release them, but have included the above statement. What does that really tell you about what they have??
You don't need to have some serious metallurgical testing to declare a JORC compliant resource, this is explained in the diagram on page 9.
All that is needed is increasing geological confidence to go from inferred to indicated to a measured resource. You need the metallurgical testing to go from resources to ore reserves. Ore reserves are used in feasibility studies to show the viability of a new mine, based on the resources. Ore reserves are a subset of resources..
In the last quarterly there was this statement on pg 2 ....
"Ore-sorting process being trialled on non-massive sulphide ore with the aim of upgrading the ore available for processing and further reducing costs"
That is another false statement, as the company does NOT have any ore possible to be upgraded!! You need a resource before you get a reserve with an 'ore statement' so the company is being misleading by implying they do have ore that can be upgraded!!
How can they say we have no resource from completed drilling on one hand, yet claim to be looking to upgrade 'ore' on the other??
They are doing all sorts of tests they should be only doing after they declare a resource, yet they state clearly the existing drilling is not sufficient for a mineral resource!!
In other words IMHO spending cash on the Scoping study etc, that would be much better spent on actually trying to find a viable resource first. Why are they spending this cash on the SS instead of drilling?? Again IMHO they have had pressure from shareholders to do something with what they have found, but don't have the heart to tell shareholders it is not enough in aclear manner, yet hide this information away in the back of announcements, so they are legally covered!!
SGQ Price at posting:
6.6¢ Sentiment: Sell Disclosure: Not Held
