Yes hkhf I should not have have estimated the NCP12 grade from...

Yes hkhf I should not have have estimated the NCP12 grade from Fig. 2 across an 18m interval. To correctly compare apples with apples, I should have estimated across 9m (centred on 221m downhole) as that is the reported interval of abundant chalcocite mineralisation as you correctly point out. As a consequence my estimated grade increases from about 0.7% to about 1.1% coincident with an estimated true thickness of about 4.4m.

I checked the intervals I used to estimate grades for the earlier 5 holes and they are unchanged and consistent with taking the 9m interval, and I recalculated my average of the 6 holes to date - it increases to about 1.2 - 1.3% (from about 1.1 - 1.2%).

Thank you for pointing out the mistake and of course I'm mortified and need to be more careful. However I remain confident with the conclusion that the average grades from the 6 holes to date are significantly less than what is needed in this vicinity for an underground mine similar to the Zone 5 mine.