Ann: Vardy Resource Drill Assays, page-3

Unfortunately, this is another drilling ann with virtually no attempt to explain the results.

There are some good and significant holes in this report but without the necessary explanation, you need to be a geo to really understand the significance:

The main facts as we see them are:

· The holes with little or no mineralisation were designed to outline the outer extent of the commercial ore body and therefore would be expected to get little or no mineral. However,
despite this, several holes, and holes 295 and 298 in particular, intersected good mineralisation.

Hole 295 which was designed to show the southern extent of the copper ore actually intersected 11m @ 2.37% Cu and 0.1% Co (3.4% Copper equivalent) as well as other significant mineralisation.

Hole 298 which was also designed to show the southern extent of the copper ore, intersected 16m @ 2.13% Cu and 0.24% Co. (4.6% Copper equivalent)!

These are very good holes and they should have been 'shouted out' in our opinion. They have also extended the southern margin of the economic mineral at these points in the Fish River Fault (FRF). This is also important and should have been explained in our opinion.

· Three of the seven holes missed the target or intersected the target at a less than optimum point. All of these holes would have recorded better assays had they intersected the Fish River Fault (FRF) at the base of the Mt Less Siltstone.

· One hole (294) was not drilled deep enough and did not intersect the FRF. If this hole had been drilled into the footwall of the FRF it may or may not have intersected mineralisation but now we will never know. The green siltstone beneath this hole has produced mineralisation up against the FRF in other parts of Walford Creek so there is no reason to assume that it would not have mineral here.

Overall, these are very good results in our opinion but they're largely hidden in the absence of proper explanation!

Hopefully, our analysis will at least help HC readers and posters?