Member Info for Ella10

Thanks Metalhead,
The reason I ask is that I was 'flicking' through this video. I haven't watched very much of it but some slides from 37:30 ish on are discussing a 100,000 S/m conductor and different thicknesses. A 3m thick conductor appeared to get a 300,000 S reading.
I don't know the provenance of the info but I may need to watch some more of the video to understand what thicknesses they are changing.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qDlj-1GVUkk

The conductivity table provided by Jeremy Brett is in S/m. We have a conductivity reading of 8200S. Does this mean that we could have an 82m deep conductor with a conductance of 100S/m?

Oh dear - all these court cases with no resolution in sight. I wonder how the legal bills are looking? I suspect it's the majors that have run for the hills quite some time ago.

From 22nd Sept RNS
'The diamond drill holes are currently being processed and will be sent off for assaying imminently once the core has been logged and processed'
Have they got lost??

Hi Fulmar,
I sold the vast majority of my shares when it was well above 5p. You called me all sorts when I suggested there was an issue with the mining licence. Who are you calling thick?? :-)))))))

Considering Mr Bird's 'residence' is Dubai I wonder if he will have gone to the show?

I don't think too many folk think a downhole length of 4.3m @ 0.59% copper is a massive amount of copper.

Even if weget a positive outcome in court today there is still this issue to be dealt with:
'The Company notes media speculation in a Zambian newspaper in respect of a debt claim made by Terra Metals and others, including Mumena Mushinge, a former shareholder of Zamsort Ltd ("Zamsort") against Zamsort, a subsidiary of the Company, in connection with a $5.8m capital raise by Zamsort in 2015 (prior to Arc becoming a shareholder of Zamsort). Arc considers that the case is without any merit, as originally notified on 10 March 2021.'

Could we have got some publicity from the Dubai mining show?

Thanks Metalhead,
You could be correct. Is it possible that the great red spot is lodestone?

Hi Metalhead,
I'm certainly not a geophysicist but I assumed, possibly incorrectly, that the EM and magnetic anomaly were linked
'According to Kavango's analysis, Target B1 appears to be coincidental with the edge of the magnetic anomaly. The Company will seek to confirm this interpretation through drilling'

The following is from the 22nd Sept RNS
'The New GRS Model estimates that the primary source of the magnetic anomaly of the Great Red Spot is positioned much closer to its northern boundary than previously recognised. Kavango believes this magnetic anomaly could be associated with a combination of Karoo and/or Proterozoic intrusions'

Thanks Joeman,
It does appear that empress are trying to limit the continuing slippage
'Empress has completed two site visits in 2021 through a third party engineering firm, and receive weekly updates from management on construction progress.'

'Give him the plant i.e. then he can go one with his lurky business.'
ARC have already tried that possibly even with the bonus of some copper and it doesn't seem to have helped matters.
Is your lawyer firm by any chance advising ARC? That could explain quite a few things.

Hi Turtlewax,
I assure you I am not accumulating at the moment. The drilling season in Zambia is about over and Kopore looking likely to sell the majority of their 35.5m shares so I think this will drop to close to 2p in the next 3 months. The Fwiji results when they eventually arrive are likely to provide some additional momentum to the drop.

The artisan mining licence took from Sept to Feb for approval. A small scale mining licence probably takes longer than an artisan one but we may get it quicker due to the Artisan licence previously being granted.

Hi Phoenix
'That one family won’t be able to raise concerns after small scale license is approved which should be any day.'
What makes you believe the licence application will be approved any day- the application hasn't even been validated?

Thanks Westlad,
That cleared up the apparent inconsistencies I was seeing in the article. Not really what I wanted to read....

Hi Andy,
18m at 0.38% CuEq (0.14% Cu, 0.41g/t Au, 0.5g/t Ag) from 142m
BRDD-021-011
From the table
146 164 18 0.14 0.41 0.60 0.39

They both could be correct but aren't really consistent.

I like the little bit of gold.
Our first intercept for this hole seems to have a discrepancy for the starting point.

Andy,
Have you been in contact yet?