This is from Johnny's post. Very astute of him to pick this up. What he says in exactly what's in the the release from June 29th and from yesterday's news. I have re-read yesterday's charts and NR and can find nothing to explain the difference in numbers. Clearly, yesterday's NR states only 14.62 metres, overall, in hole # 45.
The only common theme with these two numbers, 14.62 and and 46.12 reported on June 29th, are that each of them have a 1,2,4 & 6 in them. Could NOT have made a mistake with the numbers in print ? I doubt it very much.
So as Johnny said, it is unacceptable and we need an explanation from management on this. Thanks for digging this up, John.
strato
The two short intervals in hole # 45, reported on June 29th, are the 14.62 metres.
"Hole NOT-08-045 at Eagle One, deepened in 2009, intersected 46.12 metres of nickel, copper sulphides including two short intervals of high-grade massive sulphides."
It goes on to repeat the same data later on in the NR. Fast forward to the NR of today, August 5. The interval reported is not 46.12 meters. It is 14.62 meters. Furthermore, only one very short interval of massive sulphide is reported. Does this concern anyone else out there? How can 46.12 meters suddently become only 14.62 meters. Less than a third. If it is just a transpositional error, it is UNACCEPTABLE, especially considering that we retail investors hang our hats on these scraps of information, whereas others are likely privy to a lot more. If there is more mineralization, where is it? I must say, looking at the geographic models posted on the website this evening, the interval in hole 45 looks like it might be longer, but it is hidden behind the delineation lines for hole 49, so it is very difficult to discern. I don't mean to be overly meticulous, but it seems to me that this is a key piece of data that they did not diligently and properly communicate to us. I reread the June 29 release at least a dozen times. Did not anyone in the office reread it at least once?
