RE:RE:Drill / ok experts There is a little more nuance to exploration and classification of resources (proven / probable) and reserves (indicated / measured) then you've described, but in general I agree with your comment that FT can't really afford to delineate more proven resources at the moment.
I don't think however that the FS and related geotechnical studies / permits would be necessarily invalidated merely by the addition of additional drill holes. All of these were built and modelled by the drilling done to define the proven resource, and as long as the project hadn't materially changed, would remain valid. I doubt they would bother drilling in areas where the proven resource has already been defined.
My point in this is that it would be very advantagous for FT to continue exploration drilling and provide some expectation that the resource can be materially increased in size. They don't necessarily have to increase the proven reserves, just have some high-value hits that strongly indicate the resource can be increased in size with more drilling. A pit redesign is a relatively straightforward process from a permitting perspective anyways and unlikely to trigger EA.
There is no doubt that the FS needs to be updated anyways.
In my opinion, the NICO project appears to be only marginally profitable under a best case scenario. They need to increase the size of the project to make the economics make sense and take advantage of economies of scale.
JMHO