trial mining conclusion date, page-10

The stated reason for the trial mining was to effectively take a bulk sample, treat it and compare this to what the drilling and the related geological model predicted. It will also give indications of the nugget effect and reliability of head grade assays, mining dilution etc. etc.
The only way this can be done is to determine accurately what the total gold production is and this will require a determination of what gold has been locked in the mill. The previous releases gave an estimate based on the assayed head grade which assumes that the head grade is correct. The reconciliation process from the mill is designed to correct head grade and is calculated from the gold to tail plus gold to bullion +/- changes in GIC (gold in circuit). Due to the fineness of the particles in the tail sample, this is generally regarded as the best sample so it is normally taken as real. No one can argue with the gold in bullion figure (unless there has been theft) so this is fixed as well. Therefore, to determine what the actual head grade was, they need to determine the GIC figure.
Everyone needs to be aware that there is a real possibility that this may not be as high as calculated from the head grade assays and further understand that this is not necessarily a bad thing. What is important is to understand how accurate their prediction of grade was. Having a grade significantly higher than predicted is just as bad as having one well below. Under predicting the grade results in open pits being smaller than they should be and ends up costing more.
All will be known in the fullness of time but remember, this is about accuracy and understanding, not about how many ounces were produced.
Having said that, a good result would be nice.
My opinions only