It's good to analyze a junior's project - disecting every aspect allows one to wrap one's mind around what they have and what they might have missed -
Take for instance the recent " new " video Braveheart released - if it were not for this video
i wouldn't have seen the mine portal going into the mountain.
The main pic of mine site didn't quite emphasize this importance but the video did.
Then, after recognizing the mine portal entrance in video it is easy to identify in photo format.
NEW BULL RVER MINE - VIDEO -
https://player.vimeo.com/video/481881766 We can now identify the main portal in photo below -
It literally runs right smack into the mountain.
Completely differentthan the mine 7 level maps which kind of portrays the mine is stepped out away from the mountain.
So why do i feel this carries an importance ?
Simply put, i feel the former operators of this Bull mine may have preemtively built an underground mine too soon without factoring in the ores above grade that are SEEN riding up the miuntain side. Those are sulphide ores exposed at surface.
If the mine portal has entered into this portion of the mountain and sulphide ores are seen
on the outside and main copper depoist is in the sulphides then... hello.
Where am i headed with this subject ?
Straight ot the point - what if the ores seen running up the moiuntain were never factored into
the main resource size ?
Based on rough estimations -
I figure the width x length x height above grade
= 100m x 100m x 100m
= 1,000,000 cubics
x 2.8 ore weight factor
= 2,800,000 ore tonnes
That's nearly 3 million ore tonnes above grade.
Question becomes...
does this above grade ore body host the same mineralization as below ?
Underground ore body has sulphides.
Ourside of main mine portal we can see - sulphides.
Mine portal enters into sulphides.
YET... only the underground ore tonnage is factored.
Even worse ,the historical reports mention all sorts of ore tonnage sizes.
Braveheart has chosen to run with a modest averaging - 2.1 million tonnes.
While some reports depending on cut off... racks it up to 8.9 million tonnes.
There so much mystery wrapped around this project and if we throw in modest assesments
and lack of assaying the cobalt - it becomes a real wild card project.
But does it have to be so wild ?
No... of course not.
It's as simply as checking the drill cores - outside the veining - and ores outside the mine running up the wall.
All the while - keeping in mind....
the cobalt is seen on the hang walls + foot walls.
In the recent vidoe - Ian mentions in so many words - the premise of this mine is, copper.
YET - if the modest cobalt values are in equivelence to that of the copper values
then.... is it really all about the copper or...
should this mine be reevaluated and scopped for its cobalt credits ?
I feel no recent efforts are are being performed on the cobalt.
It's mentioned + recognized but... that's all.
We know the cobalt can run far higher in grades and as high as, .05%
while last video cobalt was chopped down to .025%.
HYPOTHETICAL ?
Let's play assume and assume the ores up the mountain did carry copper and cobalt.
Let's assume the ore seen in picture is 2,800,000 ore tonnes.
2,800,000 ( mountain ore above mine - hypo example - tbd )
x 1.8% copper
= 50,400 tonnes copper
x 93% extraction recovery
= 46,872 tonnes X 2200
= ,
103,118,400 lbs
x $4.20 spot copper
= $433, 097,280 What was that Ocean contract amount ?
45,000 tonnes. COBALT
2,800,000
X .025 %
= 7,000 tonnes ( hyop cobalt )
x $52,000 spot cobalt
= 364,000,000 We know the cobalt can run up to - .05% grade.
So... what if the cobalt was - .3% ?
= $436,800,000 I'd say it matches the copper value - right ?
QUESTION ? Why aren't these visable sulphide ores above the mine factored in ?
Now..
the tonnage with in the main mine - 7 levels - is only facotring a partial size of the full ore body potential. Meaning - veining ores.
If... there's cobalt present outside the veining - then.. .
what's the real size of this mine below grade ?
Maps sho the mine but it's so hard to make out the measurement scale -
i would love to see a new map of underground mine showing it;s length and width and depths - in a fashion that's legible.
While at it... plot the new drill results and their location to show where these drills hit copper and cobalt @ 350m.
Can't really assess this project to show its fullest potential if not given the proper tools in which to assess. It's one tihng to be modest and discount the resource size using higher cut offs - but when it comes to another mineral credit that matches the value of the copper - then, this is where one should push the junior to reveal far more intel than what's been given at present.
Cheers....
The abovde grade ores - are conceptual in nature - all based on ores hosting same mineralization as mine below grade.
Mine portal enters into the sulphides... and minerals are found in the sulphides below grade.
HENCE - what are the chances the ores above grade match below?
My hunch says.. .hogh odds.
The theme from get go - own opinion - is diminishing the Bull Mine to a small scale project.
Yet.. if one considers cut offs and potentia lother mineral credits - and - outside sukphide ores and inferred ores - and new drills showing mineralzation continues ?
Hello... it could be far larger than what's been promoted.
When one compares a copper peer with .3% grade copper with 50,000,000 tonnes ore body
Then... considers a junior with a potential 5 million ore tonnes with 1.7 - 1.8% copper grades
such is 5.7 x richer grade = 5.7 x 5 million tonnes = 28.5 million eq tonnes @ .3% comp.
Throw in cobalt copper EQ - it would certainly make a good comparable with another peer.
Yet.. .i'm not seeing any effort to do so.
Checking the cobalt values in the avail cores - and mine walls - would od wonders.
But.. i fell it's all about - minimizing.
Just my own opinion.
Cheers...