Thanks for that explanation FM, very informative. I know that the folding enables the enrichment, but it still doesn't give us a good estimation of the average width of mineralisation in the area.
Joel I hope that we find an area of sudden increased thickness like in Hope Downs North. I also do believe that UMC are conservative in their estimations as others have said. They held off on a tonnage estimate far longer than other companies. (FDL being the worse, rattling off 300MT without so much as a grab sample! I don't care how many times they say 'conceptual', it is treading a fine line to being misleading.) For that reason I feel that management are very confident of achieving the 100MT at least or they wouldn't have announced that.
I do believe the resource is there, but I can't be certain. That risk is part and parcel of investing in junior explorers and I understand that, but I'm just saying I will feel a lot better with a few more drill holes to confirm. Seems like most of you are already convinced, as are UMC management and that does provide some comfort.
Someone mentioned JORC by July in the West Australian? That would an awesome way to celebrate the end of financial year.
FM, you mentioned 1.5km north/south and 1.2km east/west but I think you'll find that the 1.2km east west doesn't extend all the way north as the tenement boundary goes diagonally and the east/west strike shortens considerably towards the North. Also UI48 is a very thin intercept and doesn't prove continuity Westwards by itself. The rest of the holes on that North South line have not hit mineralisation I believe(could be wrong)? So the ore body is not actually open to the West. I guess UMC must be thinking an average thickness of over 20m to make the 100MT. Unless the density is the issue as haemitite has said.
UMC Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
