"As I understand it all of this sample can be assayed under the...

"As I understand it all of this sample can be assayed under the current limited mining permit."

I had been think a little ahead on this question and will be looking out in the JORC Appendix that comes with the drill results as to how they split and sample the RC drill chips for assay. Typically for this type of drilling the samples are riffle split ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riffle_splitter ) during the drilling process and sampled typically (initially) on 4m intervals (ie a smaller subset of the entire quantity of material from each 4m down the hole is sent for assay initially). Remaining un-sampled material from the hole would conventionally be stored in large plastic bags representing each metre of drilling down the hole for potential resampling at narrower 1m intervals in zones that might contain higher grade mineralisation.

If for some reason I see the company trying to depart from a standard sampling and assay submission protocol it will be a red flag for me irrespective of the grades that might be reported. For example if they were to only assay one bulk sample claimed to be representative of the entire hole and give some obscure reason for doing so, this would be a red flag. There should be no reason why they wouldn't be able to collect samples and send them for assay like any other similar drilling program. In some ways, on reflection, the bulk sampling of the rock chip (surface) samples is already a little suspicious. More information about how the metal grade is distributed through the gabbro unit would have been gleaned by submitting a number of bulk samples from different locations for assay rather than combining samples from various locations into larger samples, like has been done. That will now sit as a red flag for me. Esh