RE: Analysis and sampling.19 Oct 2022 16:28
Interesting input from a poster with direct long term experience.
Actually when you thoroughly read the RNS beyond the positive news headline grabber of the noteworthy grade increases obtained for 3 of the 57 re-assayed duplicate samples, then a somewhat different picture gets painted, namely:-
These re-assays were selected from sample duplicates and so you have to believe that ECR would have been actively selecting those ones where they were expecting (via visuals etc) to return a positive outcome versus the original assay results. However the outcome is that out of the 57 re-assays tested the table of data outlines that only 16 of them (equates to 28%) saw any increase in the gold grade versus their original assay results, whilst 41 of them (equates to 72%) actually saw a decrease in the gold grade versus their original assay results. This IMO opinion is a pretty poor return for the time, cost and effort that would have been incurred on this exercise.
Furthermore, whilst there are the 3 noteworthy increase in grade samples, you can see from the table of data that there are nearly twice as many (5 noteworthy) samples where the grade value has significantly decreased, namely:-
CJD002 - a reduction of 2.93
CSD001 - a reduction of 8.87
CSD002 - a reduction of 4.74
CSD003 - a reduction of 9.89
CSD003 - a reduction of 22.13
So I would not be atall surprised when the dust settles and people digest this RNS fully that the SP drops back to what it was previously. If so a few people will have been spiked today and a few will have taken this opportunity to get out with the SP short term pumped a little higher than they could have sold for yesterday.