One thing I have thought from the first parcel I ever bought in SGQ is the company was drastically underfunded. MA as a hand-me-down from a major is an outsized prospect for a junior explorer. It could easily chew through $50M to $100M to unlock the geology. I think that explains some of the decision making by management... seeming early success with the near surface discoveries only to be disappointed that they are isolated pods... and the hither and thither approach looking for repetitions that followed. If the company had the requisite funds from the start perhaps a different mental approach might have been the result. Hindsight judgements are harsh. The way management has conducted exploration in the last 12 months looks sensible to me... some posters are calling for multiple rigs churning the ground but that is impatience in my view. I expressed the opinion in an earlier post that this upcoming seismic survey is about defining the target rather than merely trying to image the depths... if that is correct then things might be about to change for the better. We have to wait and see... probably 3 or 4 months as they step through the process.
The schematic showing the relative footprints of the MA prospect compared to some other notable deposits is entirely reasonable. Only the Cathedral belt has been drill tested with the untested ground returning similar magnetic responses. Not included in that map is the ground parallel to Cathedral which is about to have some initial RC drilling. There is the high grade proven at surface and proof it occurs at depth. Perhaps the rest of the prospect is barren... perhaps not... but the fact remains the overall exploration footprint is in the same league as the comparators.
SGQ Price at posting:
6.6¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)