Originally posted by salpetie
Not certain you would like my first pass comments on this announcement Dolce.
Infill drilling takes a lot of time to analyse especially using a manual approach as I do.
A simple way to begin is to look at the assay results and choose those with no significant results or very thin weak grades. Two holes that fit this criteria are shown as yellow hexagons on this screen shot - 180 and 182. 179 and 181 are not great either.
The results for 180-182 could negatively impact on the open pit plan. It is a matter of what this drilling means in the context of previous work.
Hole 179 represents a similar conundrum at the end of the adit. Previous drilling has shown IMO structural or grade discontinuities there.
This is from a brief look at a few of the poorer but spatially important (IMO) holes . Just the first holes I looked at.
Although the announcement came out yesterday the visuals would have been available shortly after drilling and preliminary observations added to a 3D computer data base that would have been near complete for the time of the AGM. I have gone on about variability and structure at Opasura and I suspect these latest results will be consistent with that. Effectively swings and roundabouts where losses are offset by gains in others in terms of grade and thickness.
I will look at the results over the next few days.
If managements confidence in getting Opasura off the ground is realised and combines with good results from Teck at Alacran then today's SP may seem cheap. Big Ifs..... GLTAH.
Surely discontinuities aren't problematic if they involve high mineralisation and easy access.
That's an example of what I meant by the bigger picture.