In quite a few instances Furiousgeorge, it is a rehash of the...

In quite a few instances Furiousgeorge, it is a rehash of the previous Board's "pious" espousal of what they wanted us to believe. In fact it is beneficial to compare the Half Year Report released yesterday (15/03/19) and the December 2018 QR released on 24/01/19). To some extent that is not a total surprise since the latest report has the same finish date = 31 December 2018. So are there any subtle differences.
(I am just going to compare the comments about the projects such as they are)
1. Malamute and Husky projects :
The basic wording is very similar between the two documents, in fact almost identical. There is a little bit of additional detail in the HY Report version in that we are told that 16 land access agreements were negotiated.
The sentence in the QR about Victory's geology team and the drilling contractor etc is dropped in the HY Report but much of the rest of that paragraph is retained.
2. Laverton :
Interestingly the HY Report splits comments on Laverton and Bonaparte in the HY Report compared to them being lumped together in the QR.
In this approach the decision to drop Laverton is much more clearly stated.
3. Bonaparte Project :
Initial wording here is an addition to what is stated in the QR. However, the basic message remains the same that while the company has a plan for drilling such a decision really depends on going into in a JV.
4. Galah Well :
A fundamental difference in the comments made about this project between the two reports but that is most like simply a reflection the HY Report is going back over 6 months whereas the QR is stating that nothing happened in that quarter.
5. Bolivia :
A slightly fuller commentary about the Bolivian tin project in the HY Report than the the brief two liner in the QR. However, the fuller version merely reiterates many of the surprising comments that have been made about this project in the past by the previous Board. I must admit to wondering whether the new Board has really fully come to grips with this entity. I would like to see the new Board fully explain what care and maintenance activity is being conducted on this one. I really am intrigued what the specifics are. I think the Bolivian thing deserves a separate post. I'll come to that later.

So there we are. Apart from a tweak here or a slight addition here or a variation in phrasing there much of the wording between the the previous QR and the new HY report reads pretty much word for word about the actual projects.