Maybe I expect too much, I was expecting a little more 'meat' in the content... Previous 'explorers' I've put $$$ in have done it, should be the 'bar' in my opinion...
Example: KDR (Kidman) What I'd refer to as a 'decent' drilling info-package (acknowledging these are post-results) of which most data/illustrations (less results obviously) are known prior to completion/results...
Perhaps incorrectly, I have generally come to expect that the 'meat' be provided in a clear and concise way (planned-holes, depths, completion timelines, etc, much like a scoping-brief), vs looking through several previous releases to put together an 'assessable' info-package/plan, considering we're paying for it to happen..??
I think the lack of it somewhat demonstrates 'contempt for LT SH' not to provide it to be honest...
I sincerely hope 'results are outstanding, I just have my 'reservations' regarding 'capability' to bring those results in a clear, concise and measurable way...
It's not wrong to deviate from a plan, not having a 'clear' plan might be...
Each to their own I guess...
ML
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
