Questions for the AGM, page-24

Thanks lucky 992

.. your summary of what is required for site prep is very informative.

It is information like that that sometimes my comments aim to provoke from the (lurking) woodwork and I am pleased that in this case it has been successful. I really was not serious about the porta-potti, but it did the job.

A post (like yours) where you are better informed than you were before you read it is a worthwhile post I suggest... and that's great. Thanks for taking the time to post.

My point, which could have been missed, is that this new proposed hole is to be located on top of a previous recent hole 0005 which in turn is located only about 100m from each of another two holes so it is not a virgin site and thus levelling, access and other points you rightly address have likely been completed and paid for. A useful cost/time saving for MPJ perhaps, and a reason to anticipate a more rapid drill procedure and report to shareholders on it too.

I will disagree on your closeness argument though.

Hole 5 was 337.3m EOH depth ... the proposed hole at (let us say) 20deg azimuth change and included angle say, when it reaches the same DH depth of 337.3 is 117m away and only 60m at half that DH depth. Clearly, as one then diverges away from 0005 past 337m DH it is new territory. The centre of the plate, presumably the target, is (Fig 5) modelled at 260m vertically (not 450m) or 300m DH with a 60deg dip at which point the holes are 100m apart.

Again at half the target depth you are 50m apart. So for the first part anyway of your hole you are mainly paying to drill into material that you know reasonably already from 0005 and perhaps 0004/0006 too?... so for that reason and I may be wrong, I believe that they must be getting very close.

They are fine tuning. They are stubbonly pursuing it, and not only that they would not be wasting their time just to "explain" it. It must surely show up as something more than a puddle if the modelled plate is anything to go by.

I still think that a one or two line statement about RH_C8 progress in the Report of Thursday 19th, ten days after stating the "drill rig was currently testing it" would have been nice.

Not sure about your "armchair" comment though.... a bit unfair perhaps? Most of us here I think are tryers.. being both amateurs and keen supportive MPJ shareholders. A lack of technical knowledge should never ever stop one from having a go and posting... fear of being wrong.

Never be cowed by so-called experts or those with a greater experience. Always have a go. My experience has been that "experts" are quite challengeable and some with 30 years experience have really only had one year's experience and repeated it thirty times.

If your knowledge extends to site prep, perhaps put some typical time frames on the things that you describe... now THAT would be really useful!.. thanks.

No more posts from me for now.... good luck all.. let's see what the AGM brings!!
cheers for a while
PP