Thanks for the advice Chet, ABM's Trial mining started in 2013,...

Thanks for the advice Chet,

ABM's Trial mining started in 2013, the original plan was for the trial plant (87% recovery) be used for production (on site at much less cost per oz $450 ish), maybe with a minor plant upgrade.

So we gave up cash flow at a higher profit margin, some while back (at 87% recovery rate), because of the change in plan to go with Coyote (or another plant) and had to start permitting all over from scratch and bring in Pacific Rd, watering down equity.

Yes Coyote was announced a year or so ago, but the stated plan deviated a year prior.

Was it a good choice?
I thinks so, but I an keen to know so!

Was it good for SP at the time?

no!

Would cash flow have been good for the SP 1-2 years ago?

yes!

Could we have bought Tanami out with cash flow?

Probably!

But the danger in my books was, with not drilling Old Pirate over the last year to have the best mine plan we could have rendered areas un minable, so the wait should be worth it in the long run, plus as I understand it, it was Pacific Rd that recommended this.

So if you look at all of the facts, you get the bigger picture.

There is not a report I haven't read in detail for Tanami or ABU probably going back 4-5 years.

I believe in ABU's assets the potential cant be matched, but now is the time to perform, not for potential.

By perform I mean, full production and its outcome.

Regards MarkH