I'm glad you asked Maher. From an engineer's point of

view the move from g and oz per tonne to g / m makes

limited sense to me.

It's true that e.g. 1 oz/tonne would become roughly 5

gram / meter, for some defined area.

A low value of 0.1 g / tonne would fall off the radar at

0.02 g / meter and perhaps not be reported.

It also converts the results to entirely depending on area/

volume rather than weight, which is a good thing in

that who cares what the quartz matrix weighs.

But it takes away easy comparison with other exploration

ventures. It also depends on

an areal measurement rather than volume of a core, and

so can make it unclear to me what area they might be

referring to, whereas the volume of a section of drill

core is easy to understand.

I have seen this very little elsewhere.

I hope there is a better explanation.

Thanks for asking and thanks to anyone else who asks

some more.