I think they would get away without further disclosure on the...

I think they would get away without further disclosure on the "insufficiently definite" phrase. In my experience, ASX is far more concerned with disclosure of information that is not sufficiently definite than the non disclosure of information. They pursued Forest for years on the grounds that he had announced financing when it was insufficiently definite, when ultimately the finance deal was completed and nobody who acted on the information lost money. They can't have it both ways: procecute someone for announcing information that was insufficiently definite and then object when another company is reluctant to release information that it considers insufficiently definite. Surely PIO could argue that both volume and grade were insufficintly definite to announce. Then we have the "overburden" which may have value but is completely indefinite. I think that is sufficiently uncertain to justify the lack of an announcement. Sorry, but you will just have to do your own research. I have done mine and am happy to buy at these prices. People have to understand that company directors and ASX are not terribly concerned for traders and short term fluctuations in price. The stock exchange is supposed to be an instrument to provide capital for long term investment. That is the reality and the rules and administration are designed to protect long term investors, not day traders.