What’s CBE Worth, page-941

Thanks for the in-depth analysis aubin. I might be wrong, but thought the original ANN regarding hole NCP12 is "...NCP12 has intersected an 18m zone of visible copper mineralisation (down hole) which includes 9m of notable visual chalcocite mineralisation confirmed with pXRF...". So i would respectfully disagree to put an estimated 0.7% avg over the whole 18m mineralisation instead better just stick to (or at least including) the emphasized 9m notable visual chalcocite mineralisation with a higher Cu grade? And same should apply to the 5 other drilled holes as well? It would be more realistic (?) if say taking NCP10 as an example as in its original ANN "...69m intersection of visible Cu mineralisation including 13m with abundant chalcocite...", that we will have a bit lower avg Cu grade (< 1%) whilst over the whole length of 69m mineralisation yet have a higher grade (between 1%-5%) on the focused 13m intersection. Guess will have to patiently wait for the actual assay results (which is imminent) and fingers crossed. Cheers.