Latest posts include tables which I didn't duplicate well...
Data is easier to view if you check out the GOMRF PR directly, as through Yahoo, etc.
Bottom line on the analysis of the last few PRs... I note two or three things I care about...
First, a lot of the holes being reported out now do show some pretty good intersections, but they are tending to begin around 200 meters in depth... while a few are showing some pretty good values a bit closer to the surface, from 30 meters, etc. Two hundred meters is a lot of rock to move to get to the good stuff... so, will be watching for trends in the geometry showing there are near surface materials available which might better justify the effort in starting to dig a hole...
Second, that same issue applies in considering recent PR addressing a couple reported finds of higher values in niobium and HREE... which occurred in smaller intersections and at greater depths near the bottoms of the holes... The higher values they've reported certainly are intriguing... but, thus far, not more than that. Meanwhile they're still showing they've got a very solid prospect with very long intersections over hundreds of meters that are giving them values between 1.5 and 3% TREE...
Third, the values being reported for iron in the latest round of PR are "marginal" if you were looking for an pure iron prospect... however, they're clearly solidly "in the ball park" for a lower grade iron deposit... and as far as having a secondary mineral that will be a useful byproduct you could certainly do a lot worse than having 20% iron. That's a big enough value that it should easily help to justify development of the prospect, with the iron values probably covering the costs of mining, and then some...
|
