What happened to just reporting facts? They haven't finished, so...

What happened to just reporting facts?

They haven't finished, so there is no point in reporting half-cooked information.

e.g. 4 development areas in Stacpoole.
Say they announced after each 1 and 1st 1 was below expectation, price tanks, then they announce batch 2, which is substantially better than market expectation, price rockets and then 3 & 4 are the same... I don't want to be on that roller coaster.

Results with a nice Stacpoole picture including a grade legend for the stope would do me nicely and smooth the expectation out with an overall grade. Not all parts of any stope are economic (there are minable shapes and dilution to consider - even in airleg), so lets see what the model and plan says before jumping to conclusion.

The only comment we really want to see is a decision to trial mine and the reasoning and grade shape backing it up. Anything to do with interim results is irrelevant and I'll reiterate my thoughts that it would be extremely disappointing if development had been carried out with announced face sampling of EVERY face on progression and they had persisted with such development if grab sampling had produced sub-economic grades. As part of any normal heading sterilisation they should be able to say at any stage that there is no gold after x cuts, or estimate a section grade if they develop through ore. So either things are proceeding according to plan or there has been some serious mis-management and waste of company resources going on - they could afterall have stopped immediately if geo sampling said so and jacked Stacpoole in and switched to ROD with the funds they had at the time. Just something to think about. My thoughts are still that this has been managed properly and like a normal mining operation.