RE:Is anyone else a little perplexed on his answer about Cleo I think overall cleo sample grades were fairly representative of what they were expecting to find from the model. However they got carried away and sensationalized it a bit (or we did) when they found the physical proof and forgot to emphasize that they were expecting something in that area.
At least he was clear in answering the question re: how representative the bulk sample was of the overall resource. He said/implied it was very representative as they picked the bulk sample area based on it having the average number of mineral hits and average number of drill holes. They are very confident of the modelling done on the project.
aweigh wrote: She asked him the amount of Cleo contained in the BS , can't remember exactly how she worded it now but Bobs answer wasn't very informative and I don't know how to read that. I guess we just have to hope that the Cleo was representative of it's share of the BS and no more. It's sortof an odd position to be in to have to defend or be appologetic about the fact that you got luckey and found a very high grade deposit with some zones that are completely off the charts.
But still I would have thought that maybe something a bit more specific might have been warranted given our situation.......why not just say " 100 tons , or 150 tons etc. "
Anyone have an opinion on that ?