Share
2,335 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 79
clock Created with Sketch.
06/03/19
20:00
Share
Originally posted by Kranky:
↑
"Unfortunately Kranky , its still the same mine with the same shaft , the same plant and the same reefs with exactly the same gold in them , so however good management are there are a lot of things they can,t change." ------------------------------------ I will start with this first sentence which could be seen to be generally and technically correct, however: 1) The winder in the shaft has been upgraded so it is faster and more reliable. 2) The plant has been upgraded to better deal with the deorite which was a big issue with MCO's gold recovery. 3) More detailed analysis of historical data with current drilling results to determine best options to drill and discover new reefs - hence the first drill into a suspected gold zone and hence McNally's. 4) Better and more cost effective drilling techniques are being applied to ascertain new gold reefs/zones. ...and probably the most important factor that is different... 5) A BoD that listens and heeds the advice of their mining, production and geo team rather than a BoD that dictates to their mining, production and geo team where they should be drilling and mining...against their experts advice. Yes, 4-6 weeks will be telling. The K
Expand
Considering Greg Curnow was chief geo and on the board I guess it’s possible he would ignore his own advice and mine and drill in places he believed there was less likely to be gold ????