Originally posted by binwood
Originally posted by Seb93
It would also be nice of you to add that AVZ used a diamond drill and had NO hits from 0-65.5m below surface. 4CE are having hits from SURFACE and only drilled up to a depth of 60M. Yes this wasn't the smartest option imo but since you like comparing AVZ to 4ce that is also a note worthy of discussing.
Once again, please don't think I'm saying 4CE will be anything like AVZ, just stating a fact that AVZ's first drill didn't result in any lithium from 0-65.5 meters.
Yeah because of the angle of the drill hole. They started the drill away from the pegamtite and drilled into it. You can see from the diagram. The peg basically outcrops at surface. You don't drill straight down the peg, the aim is to hit perpendicular so that you can determine as best as possible what true width is. If you move the point of entry 30-40m N/NW then the intersection would have happened significantly closer to surface
Don't always see eye to eye with bin, but he's exactly right.
AVZ was fortunate enough to have a relatively good degree of information prior to its first drills so they were always going to be more on the money.
there's pros and cons to take away from the announcement really
pro:
there's lithium
at surface
ok grade (for surface)
potentially economical if grades and width improve at depth
further drilling can be refined to target best grade/best width areas
cons
spodumene? (unknown)
veiny as hell (strip ratio high if mineralisation continues at depth)
there's a few other points I'd make, still have the other project, and economics could improve. CR is on the cards also. result wasnt too bad ans mean investors wont lose much if any. which is alot better than if it was a complete dud.
*disclosure current avz holder, previous 4ce holder and watching from the sidelines until something economic looks a good chance. happy to pay a premium.
SF2TH
