Great work indeed! That would leave the analyses by some others, including some institutional ones, in the dust. In Geol_Pro's work, all the salient details are listed along with justification of the assumptions used. Hats off him.

Noticed that he has dropped to "discount factor of 50%" in his 9 June conclusion, unless he wanted to throw away the contribution from the West pipe, just like I did from my showbox model (actually, a slice of a hard boiled egg squeezed in the box). My crystal ball said 27 M tonned ore for the East pipe using s.g of 2.7 and @ 5% Gr. If the number were adjusted using his values of 2.5 and 4.1% grade the my number would come down to approx. 1.0M tonnes of Gr (1.35 M tonne Gr x (2.5/2.7) x (4.1%/5%) = 1M tonnes). This is in the same order of magnitude with his number of 0.8 M tonnes of Gr. This 20% difference could be considered as the same, taking into account two different ways of looking at the deposit (for the East pipe only).

As indicated, I threw away the West pipe just to be on the conservative side. And this (along with Geol_Pro latest value for the East pipe) would put a lower limit on the size of the deposit.

This is a conservative way of derisking an investment.

So, the only way is up?

goldhunter