Ann: Significant Zone of Bornite at Thursday's Gossan, page-35

Character assassination?

I was pointing out some observations that I had from reading the announcement. When I first skim read it the last photo, photo 3, was the most impressive that I could see amongst the core photos. Later when I read the announcement more carefully it became clear that it was from a hole drilled last year and reported on the 18th of Dec 2018. I wonder how many other people made the same mistake as me thinking that core photo was from the hole 44. The announcements also suggest that this high sulphidistaion style of mineralisation seen in the core in photo 3 is a "higher-level" style of mineralisation found in porphyry-related mineralised systems, so is not the direct style of mineralisation being sought at this stage. It has been sugested that it overprints the targeted style.

I also went on to read the description and look at the photos provided in support of the claim of a significant bornite intersection. From the descriptions and the photos it was hard for me to come to the conclusion that the intersection was significant but then again I am not an expert. If you want to debate the information in the announcement then that is fine but please don't make assertions about what my intentions are.

As far as my comment about all the "points of the compass" I think that is fair enough because back in Oct of last year after the independent Corbett report came out the focus on finding the "hotter" bornite mineralisation was on the west side of the NSS structure (see figure 3 on page 5 and last paragraph on page 17 of the "Corbett" announcement of 16 Nov 2018). To say that the search has gone from east to west to north and now to south, ie all the points of the compass is a fair characterisation IMO.

It looks to me from looking at the core in the announcement and reading the descriptions that Chalcopyrite is more dominant in hole 44 than bornite as I can see little evidence of the bornite in the photos. Granted CC said the disemminated bornite was hard to spot against the dark coloration of some of the host rocks but I would have expected to see better examples of bornite than the one shown in that silica clast to warrant describing the intersection as significant.

I think on a public forum people have a right to challenge information and put their own spin on things without making it personal. In any respect throwing aside all academic arguments, the requirement as CC has put it, is that now that they have "found" a hotter spot with associated bornite they should start seeing rising gold grades. If they don't it could point to the system being gold poor as I have suggested in the past.

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/an...994432/page-119?post_id=30795343#.XGIx_ho_WhA

The above thread is where in Feb 2018 I suggested that based on chemical zoning this system could be gold poor and I copped a fair spray from crimson carp for suggesting it. His absence is noted on these threads considering he once claimed to be "all in" on SVY with it being his only investment on ASX.

As an investor I follow the story with interest and await the next round of assay results. Esh