Member Info for CuriousCat9

Would moreover still be Rudyard to come as well as the option to raise some more cash and have another shot at Ingomar

0.42 is the cos for the Amsden Formation. Charles, Flathead and Precambrian are 0.29, 0.39 and 0.11 respectively. Since all four formations are going to be explored in the same drill then that would mean the chance of discovery in at least one of these 4 formations is about 78% by my maths which doesn’t sound too bad!

If the recent fall back really is just a case of one big holder reducing and spooking a few PIs then as soon as the shares are in new hands normal service should hopefully resume. Drilling after all is not expected until the end of Q3 and flow testing not until the beginning of Q4 so with another 3 months of relative security before HEX faces its do or die moment then plenty of time still for the share price to break 30p and hopefully a bit more given the company’s potential.

Anyone better informed have any advice regarding the realistic chances of success/failure in Q3-4 as I’m trying to workout what proportion of my capital I should risk leaving invested in HEX at the time of the drill/flow test as whilst the continuing ascent of the share price in the interim would seem a pretty safe bet, at that point Hex suddenly becomes a bit of a gamble!

I’ve no idea how reliable the probability scores from Ryder Scott on page 107 of the admissions document are likely to be especially given the intriguing helium anomaly recorded near the Hillison wellbore, but if I’ve understood correctly the chances of ‘geologic discovery’ in at least one of the 4 formations is approx. 78%. Given that the volume of gas in the Amsden and Precambrian reservoirs are believed to be much smaller (looking at page 73 here), I presume however our focus is largely on the Flathead and Charles formations and the probability of geologic discovery in at least one of these is approx. 57%. The chances that all four chambers contain helium and the 2.3bcf figure is realised on the other hand would seem to be very small.

As flow rates, concentrations and potential technical problems are not I understand involved in the calculation of geologic discovery probability, would it be fair to characterize HEX’s prospects as follows: 1 in 4 chance of complete failure with all investor capital wiped out, 1 or 2 in 4 chance of a neutral outcome, i.e. a just about viable business but volumes/concentrations/flow rates insufficient to support further share price growth, and a 1 or 2 in 4 chance of a significant find with multibagger potential?

Never a popular move to post anything negative on investor forums, especially as a first post, but having bought a few EEE shares yesterday largely on the basis of the recent Crux interview with Shaun Bunn, I’ve subsequently come across quite a damning article entitled ‘Empire Metals: an alternative perspective’. It was published 3 months ago and will doubtless be well-known here but scrolling back through the forum to late March I can’t seem to find any discussion of it so wanted to ask those who've been following EEE a lot longer than me whether the author's analysis is still credible? Specifically, that this project will eventually require a sizeable injection of cash to get off the ground will come as a surprise to precisely no one, but rather concerned by the author’s scepticism regarding the economic viability of processing the titanite as if correct that would seem to immediately put the kibosh on things however vast the resource.

[LINK REMOVED]