Alexandria Minerals Corp ALXDF

RE:RE:Visualizing the Drill Programs at Orenada

[NextPhase]

GH,

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

If you want to see the larger image, then right click on it and open the image in a new tab.

Here is the chart with the reference lines changed to 25, 75, and 125 au g/t multiplied by intercept length in meters. The histogram in the second chart, from the prior post, is the easier way to count the occurrences of the number of intercepts above this 25 number.



Based on my analysis, the 2015-2017 program has 67 intercepts above 25 gpt * length in meter, while the 2007-2008 program only had 10 above this 25 number. I'm not sure if they used other historical holes for the original resource estimate, but I only found three historical holes mentioned in the 2007-2008 press releases.

From other comments on this board, it seems like we are still waiting for results from additional drilling. Some people originally thought it was because they lacked any hits, but I think it's more likely the results haven't been sent back yet because of the recent rumblings about a potential backlog.

Of course I want to caution the results from my analysis, because at best, I can only have a very abstract idea on how this all will translate into a new resource estimate. I am also not a trained geologist or a financial advisor, so you should temper expectations from my conclusions.

Saying that, after reviewing this data more closely, my expectations have increased about the upcoming resource estimate. Although I try to stay objective and as transparent as possible, I urge everyone to conduct their own DD and not solely rely on my work.

 

A rough eye-balling exercise give me x4, i.e. the post 2009 would be x4 better than the RE of 0.5Moz, i.e. 0.5 x 4 = 2Moz = $200M for Orenada.

Yeah, I hate increasing expectations to 2 million ounces, because I'm so uncertain about some of the finer details of the final resource estimate. I still consider a lot of this as guess work :-) However, *if* they can double the resource area and double the grade, then that alone seems like it would be a 4x increase to me.

As you mention, it's difficult for me to have too much confidence with that number without a 3D model and trained professionals to interpret these results. However, even if we are talking about 1.25 - 1.5 m oz and 1.5 - 1.7 au grade, which I *think* is conservative based on these drill results, then I have to think we are significantly undervalued based on a 30-35 mil market cap in USD. Especially, when considering the market would not only need readjust the valuation for the increase in total metal count, but to also reflect the higher value placed on resources that can be mined economically.

It *seems* to me like the market significantly undervaluing Alexandria Minerals based on the recent drill results at Orenada.

NP

Disclosure: I own AZX, I'm not a geologist, and you should not take this analysis as financial advice :-)