Copper Fox Metals Inc V.CUU

RE: RE: RE: drill #3

[imerc23]

Riskkee said: "...The IP anomaly mentioned can be seen on this geophysical model (seen in survey section L2400N)
https://www.copperfoxmetals.com/s/Image.asp?i=maps/3D-GEOPHYSICAL-MODEL.jpg&id=428531"
.
Chappy replied:

I don't think that what you see in the Geophysical model is the IP anomaly.I think the IP anomaly identified in the corporate presentation isjust north of the last 'slice' of the 3D-Geophysical model - by about220 m. That is if the IP anomaly was drawn correctly on the corporatepresentation (slide 12: https://www.copperfoxmetals.com/i/pdf/CUU-Presentation.pdf). This is good! The IP anomaly should be additional mineralogy to what we have scanned to date - more potential resource.

I say:

I think that Riskee is correct, meaning that the IP anomaly which Copper Fox is referring to in its May 31, 2011 NR ("the separate large chargeability anomaly located north of the Paramount Zone") -- where the second drill will be placed -- is the same as "Area A" shown on the Chargeability Model, meaning that it is the same thing as the small red blob, close to the surface, on L2400 of the Geophysical model. Note that the Chargeability Model shows "Area A" as being rather close to the surface.

Don't get me wrong -if they have found another chargeability anomaly which is 220 meters north of L2400, then I'd be delighted, but how would they know that it was there? (unless the aerial survey has recently found it). The 2010 Titan24 survey didn't go any further north than L2400, I don't believe.