Evidence based speculation, page-81

You always dodge the assay question, the complication it raises about the JORC reporting and most importantly the actual nature of the PMG mineralisation. Read the company's own disclosure that I have posted above.

I've reposted it below with emphasis in yellow. With your theoretical drill hole spacing you are assuming continuity where there is no basis to do so as the mineralisation is not understood. Notice they are not even calling it a deposit or an orebody, it's a geological unit or "body". Read their own words "the nature of the mineralisation has yet to be established".

You are free to do your own speculating on the nature of the mineralisation and assume it is homogenously distributed and amenable to economic extraction but that is just not a fact at the moment, neither are your estimates of how many holes will be required to define a resource of any type, JORC or non-JORC. Your posts are misleading based on the published information IMO. Esh