Yes, thanks for that. This is an important extract imo from the...

Yes, thanks for that.

This is an important extract imo from the 15/10/15 SFR ann (my emphasis):

Based on field observations, the mineralogy of the 19.9 metre intercept in TLDD0026 differs from that observed in the previously reported intersections of the primary mineralisation in TLDD0004A, TLDD0005, TLDD0009, TLDD0010, and TLDD0021. The massive sulphides intersected in these earlier holes comprises variable amounts of chalcopyrite (main copper-bearing sulphide mineral), pyrite and pyrrhotite, minor sphalerite and galena, along with silicate and talc gangue minerals (with gold and silver).

The primary mineralisation in TLDD0026 has a similar composition to that of the earlier holes but also contains variable amounts of bornite (a copper-bearing sulphide). Both the bornite and other sulphide minerals are deformed and exhibit features consistent with re-crystallisation, which suggests that modification of the massive sulphide may have occurred during deformation.

Bornite is an important copper mineral and commonly occurs in VMS deposits globally, along with the more common chalcopyrite. Bornite, in isolation, typically has a copper content of approximately 63 per cent by mass.

My research tells me that bornite can be either primary or secondary. The bornite found at Monty was primary I'm sure. The bornite in RCs 2 and 3 could be either primary or secondary. However, enquiries made by me recently of non-company people have me thinking that the Wodger bornite is probably secondary. Given that the bornite is not as deep as the malachite and azurite in RC5, then that would make sense. In other words, it's an altered form of chalcopyrite which is the standard primary copper mineral.

I'm not getting too excited about the bornite, but I'm open to being surprised. We should know soon enough as the lab assays should be not that far away.