Consistent them of keep ug mine intact while promote open pit.
= makes no sense but it would make sense if another wants ug mine separate.
2011 PROPHECY - focal point majority ug mine at surface above ug mine
- good handle on contained estimated resources
2014 - 2015
- much of the ug mine inferred is moved to = ( m + i ) ( 1st chart )
- additional inferred tonnage ( 846 mil tonnes ) is tacked on ( 1st chart )
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53294034400_a645049e8f_c.jpg - all with in ( yellow ) pea constraint ( not the phase 5 larger pitshell )
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53320845588_6e26abc7b6_c.jpg 329 mil tonnes ( m + i )
846 mil tonnes ( inf )
All the above
= 516 ug mine holes / 80 above ug mine with small western portions
= it's all about ug mine ( sulphide / gabbs / clino
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infamous Highgrade Zone Notice the ug mine is whitwashed ( kept intact
Yet...all original resource sizes were spawned from this ug mine zonation
Sulphide + Gabbs are far easier to extract metals from
Versus Silicates ( silicates require ulteafine grinding )
2018 - met tests increased grind size
meaning - courser grind size - to save on power consumption
Johnson's drill hole reveals what below ug mine And... what small investors recieve with 34% pea pit shell
vs mass tonnage below pea pitshell - where forward junior team said they'd go
back to deep east zones yet... never followed through.
2017 - rolls round test sulphide and gabbs later ( separate from silicates )
Yet... were these sulphide ores not the primaries for the 2011 to 2015 resource sizes ?
Sure were.
And.... since 2015 extraction studies
only factored 10% peridotite
then, this supports majority sulphides and gabbs
The 2017 recharacterizing the ores = ( ) the entire deposit.
Along with tweaking cutoffs / zone name and boundary changes + 10% more resource
deduction from 74 holes ( 2015 - 2016 ) due to spot prices - lol
If .....
sulphides / gabbs / clino ore were grouped + silicated mined later
the extraction percentage recoveries would considerably increase.
Supposing 2017 ( test sulphides + gabbs later ) were partitioned
then... what would the deposit be comprised of ...?
Silicate ores.
If new met tests in, 2017 / 2018
and with courser grind = poor recoveries
Questions... Where's the sulphides and gabbs ( core high grade tonnage ) 250 mil tonnes ?
Why was the ug mine always kept intact while pushing open pit ?
Who has the 2013 reassaying files ?
Why assay and measure exotics but never include in, resource calcs ?
Why promise to pull plats out = more shareholder value but never follow through ?
Which is why i've always maintained separate small shareholders from larger holders
payout small shareholders
why suffer us with drag, delay, numerous revisions, cheap dilution, poor pfs
that kind of formula is anything but.... shareholder friendly
Those original high grade sulphides and gabbs ( 2011 )
create a significant amount of metal pounds per cubic vs silicate cubic tonne.
Cheers....