"Provide a retort that contains facts or disappear with your lack of substantive posting."
To be clear, I said the Q2 sulphide result was a shocker(as one of a number of points I was making at the time). I never said the mine was a shocker and I leave you to your calculations on your 3D model calculations.
You have stated that Q2 was within expectations but without some context of how you expect things to evolve over the next 2 periods - that's the same as saying "we will have weather today"........You are relying on a graph showing projected mining rates going forward, so how does that extrapolate out to show YOU things are on target?????.........I am unable to find a way to show how it can be done.
I understand that 2.7g/t gives you 15,627 and that this is less than 21,544ozs........but it is meaningless..... You haven't even adjusted for recovery, so using 85% that gives you 13,281ozs...... What does that mean in the context of the Q2 result????.........NONE of this supports your argument that the result was as expected, there is NO context!!! It was long winded, and you made it sound convincing, but the Emperor has no clothes.
Prove me wrong tell me what you expect for Q3 and Q4, and how you arrived at the numbers.
.....and see if you can do it by sticking to the facts and without trying to refocus the debate, ..... and without the little quips and comments designed to belittle and discredit.
(20min delay)
