RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Why do you like (still) Novo?Allenbow Nothing contradictory at all - As the Geologist and I have pointed out on many occasions you must differentiate between continuity of conglomerates and continuity of gold bearing conglomerates. Noone disputes continuity of conglomerates -after all there are 20 metre horizons for miles under Mt Roe Basalt as at Kangan but are they gold bearing and then are they econonomically viable -why grade is crucial not as people on here have said is not important. From the information thus far the gold is concentrated around the discovery areas and is not continuous.
I still hold Artemis - the jury is out on whether any ARV conglomerates like Patch 47 demonstrate they are any more continuous than Purdys and Comet Well. Somehow I doubt - but having said that at least Artemis have a substantial plant so that trial mining can be conducted enabling the mined material to be processed in a practical and professional manner. From that as exploration continues shareholders will be able to assess the conglomerate gold potential with the bonus structural gold resources which can also be processed for their gravity gold content -if that is considered a viable proposition.
DeGrey are proceeding methodically but I would ramp that up too and really put some ore through -so from my perspective Artemis are where I would be placing my bets if conglomerate gold was my only focus. As you know I work across all commodities and given the continuity of gold in conglomerates thus far is disappointing you might be wise to hedge your bets. Cheers