TIDMEST
RNS Number : 5888T
East Star Resources PLC
21 March 2023
THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONTAINS INSIDE INFORMATION FOR THE PURPOSES
OF ARTICLE 7 OF REGULATION 2014/596/EU WHICH IS PART OF DOMESTIC UK
LAW PURSUANT TO THE MARKET ABUSE (AMMENT) (EU EXIT) REGULATIONS (SI
2019/310) ("UK MAR"). UPON THE PUBLICATION OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT,
THIS INSIDE INFORMATION (AS DEFINED IN UK MAR) IS NOW CONSIDERED TO
BE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
NOT FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION, IN WHOLE OR IN
PART, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY IN OR INTO THE UNITED STATES,
AUSTRALIA, CANADA, JAPAN, THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA OR ANY OTHER
JURISDICTION WHERE TO DO SO WOULD CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE
RELEVANT LAWS OF SUCH JURISDICTION.
21 March 2023
East Star Resources Plc
("East Star" or the "Company")
Independent Exploration Target for Verkhuba Copper-Zinc-Lead
Deposit, Kazakhstan
East Star Resources Plc (LSE:EST), which is defining mineral
resources in Kazakhstan for the energy revolution, is pleased to
announce an independent JORC-compliant Exploration Target conducted
by leading resource advisors AMC Consultants on the Verkhuba
Copper-Zinc-Lead Deposit on the Rudny Altai VMS belt.
Highlights:
-- Exploration Target of 19-23 Mt at 1.0-1.4% Cu and 1.0-1.4% Zn (1.4-1.9% CuEq)
-- Exploration Target is defined by 97 drill holes comprising
42,178 m of historical diamond drilling, reviewed by East Star over
the past 12 months, providing a reasonable level of confidence in
the geological interpretation
-- Historical drilling was over 2.89 km(2) of laterally
extensive mineralisation in a grid pattern of circa 100x100 m in
the central part of the deposit and 200x100 m on its flanks
-- Further possible significant exploration upside exists in
drill-ready satellite targets identified in 2022 helicopter
electromagnetic ("HEM") survey
-- Historical metallurgical test work reported Au and Ag grades
in technological samples equal to 0.3 g/t Au and 14.2 g/t Ag
indicating potential to further enhance the value per tonne of
ore
-- Potential for low-CAPEX development using existing processing capacity within the region
-- Verification and infill drilling has been planned to upgrade
Exploration Target to JORC-compliant resources with drilling
expected to commence this summer
Exploration Target Summary Table
Mining method Tonnes Zn Cu Pb
--------------
(kt) (%) (%) (%)
-------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Open pit 5,000 - 6,000 0.5 - 0.8 1.4 - 1.8 0.1 - 0.2
Underground 14,000 - 17,000 1.2 - 1.6 0.8 - 1.2 0.1 - 0.2
---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total 19,000 - 23,000 1.0 - 1.4 1.0 - 1.4 0.1 - 0.2
---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
-- This is an Exploration Target and should not be considered to be a Mineral Resource
-- The Exploration Target assumes an open pit mining method with
marginal cut-off of 0.38% Cu equivalent and underground mining
method with the marginal cut-off of 0.86% Cu equivalent
-- A nominal dry density values of 3.0 t/m(3) was assumed to be
appropriate for the style of mineralisation
-- Cu equivalent was calculated using the following metal
prices: 3,050 US$/t for Zn, 9,000 US$/t for Cu, 2,250 US$/t for
Pb
-- Tonnage is reported on dry basis
Figure 1 Micromine model of ore bodies including modelled open
pit scenario.
Alex Walker, East Star CEO, commented:
"This Exploration Target validates the statement that the
Verkhuba Deposit is a game changer for East Star. The Exploration
Target is based on 42,178 m of historical diamond drilling which
should require a limited twin drilling programme to upgrade to
JORC-compliant resources. The Exploration Target of 19-23 Mt @ 1.4%
- 1.9% Cu equivalent is already significant, with potential for
additional tonnage in some of the orebodies.
"The Verkhuba Deposit is 2.89 km(2) within a 30 km(2) ore
district which also includes multiple drill-ready HEM targets.
Furthermore, with significant infrastructure already in place and
excess processing capacity within the region from both Glencore
(Kazzinc) and KAZ Minerals, it may be possible to fast track the
Verkhuba Deposit into production with low capital expenditure.
"With high-grade copper mineralisation already identified,
significant exploration upside and a potential route to low-CAPEX
development, East Star is uniquely positioned for growth in 2023
within a progressive mining jurisdiction. We are eager to commence
verification and infill drilling over the Verkhuba Deposit this
summer."
Webcast Presentation
A short webcast presentation about the independent Exploration
Target for the Verkhuba Copper-Zinc-Lead Deposit by East Star's CEO
is available via the Company's website at:
https://www.eaststarplc.com/presentations .
Background
East Star Resources commissioned AMC Consultants Pty Ltd ("AMC")
to prepare a Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") and a conceptual pit
optimisation and analysis for the Verkhuba Deposit located in
eastern Kazakhstan. For reporting purposes, the MRE was converted
to an Exploration Target range under JORC reporting standards.
Exploration of the project area was carried out in the 1950s
through to the 1990s, mostly by surface core drilling. Exploration
adits and drives were also developed at the Verkhuba Deposit, but
the database for underground channel sampling was not available.
Mineralised bodies are represented by VMS shallow dipping
sheet-like bodies and lenses.
A total of 97 diamond drillholes define the Verkhuba Deposit
with a total of 42,178 m of drilling. 62 drillholes were used for
the grade estimate. The deposit area was sampled using diamond
drillholes at variable spacings - from 200 m x 200 m to 100 m x 100
m spacing.
To establish the Exploration Target, AMC completed the following
phases of work:
-- Database import and validation
-- Classical statistical analysis
-- Interpretation and wireframing of mineralised zones using
metal equivalent grades available in the database
-- Data selection and compositing
-- Block model development
-- Grade interpolation and model validation
-- Preliminary pit optimisation study using a base case scenario
-- Pit analysis and a preliminary scoping estimate of the deposit's economic potential
-- Development of verification and an infill drilling programme
Geological modelling was completed by AMC which resulted in 59
interpreted and wireframed mineralised bodies. A block model
constrained by the interpreted mineralised bodies was constructed
with the parent cell size of 5 mE x 5 mN x 2 mRL with standard
sub-celling five times in all directions to maintain the volume
resolution of the mineralised bodies. Drillhole sample intervals
have been composited to 1 m length and were used to interpolate all
main modelled grades (Zn, Pb, Cu) into the block model using
ordinary kriging (OK) interpolation techniques. Block grades were
validated both visually and statistically and all modelling was
completed using Micromine software.
Constant average bulk density values of 3.0 t/m(3) were applied
to each model cell, which was assumed from the historical
reports.
Exploration Target
The grade estimate and subsequent Exploration Target allowed an
assessment of the integrity of the input data. It was also used to
confirm estimation and reporting of exploration potential ranges of
tonnage and grades for the Verkhuba Deposit. The Exploration Target
is to be reported in accordance with the JORC Code*.
Table 1 shows the Exploration Target for the Verkhuba Deposit
for both open pit and underground mining methods. The Exploration
Target is based on actual Exploration Results that were obtained
during several historical exploration programmes completed between
1950 and 1990 when a total number of 97 diamond holes were drilled
totaling 42,178 m. The estimated potential quantity of tonnes and
grades are conceptual in nature as there has been insufficient data
and evaluation to support estimation of a Mineral Resource.
Tonnages and grades are expressed as ranges that are considered
appropriate for the Exploration Target. There is no certainty that
further exploration, verification drilling, or twinned drilling
will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource. The
Exploration Target is not to be considered in any way to represent
a Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve.
Table 1 Verkhuba Exploration Target estimate for open pit and underground mining methods
Mining method Tonnes Zn Cu Pb
--------------
(kt) (%) (%) (%)
-------------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Open pit 5,000 - 6,000 0.5 - 0.8 1.4 - 1.8 0.1 - 0.2
Underground 14,000 - 17,000 1.2 - 1.6 0.8 - 1.2 0.1 - 0.2
---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total 19,000 - 23,000 1.0 - 1.4 1.0 - 1.4 0.1 - 0.2
---------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Notes:
-- This is an Exploration Target and should not be considered to be a Mineral Resource
-- The Exploration Target assumes an open pit mining method with
marginal cut-off of 0.38% Cu equivalent and underground mining
method with the marginal cut-off of 0.86% Cu equivalent
-- A nominal dry density values of 3.0 t/m(3) was assumed to be
appropriate for the style of mineralisation
-- Cu equivalent was calculated using the following metal
prices: 3,050 US$/t for Zn, 9,000 US$/t for Cu, 2,250 US$/t for
Pb
-- Tonnage is reported on dry basis
Following the Exploration Target, AMC made the following
findings:
-- The quality of procedures for the historical data collection
used for the Exploration Target estimate is believed to be of
sufficient standard
-- The Exploration Target for the Verkhuba Deposit was prepared
using data, geological interpretation and understanding, and
estimation practices that are appropriate for the style of
mineralisation
-- The cut-off grades which have been calculated for reporting
open pit and underground Exploration Target are considered
reasonable and based on justifiable assumptions and parameters
-- The Exploration Target has potential to be developed via open
pit and underground mining methods, and it has been delineated and
reported in accordance with the JORC Code
-- Further verification and infill drilling are required to
upgrade the current Exploration Target to a Mineral Resource
*Note: Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results,
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. The JORC Code, 2012 Edition.
Prepared by: The Joint Ore Reserves Committee of The Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Australian Institute of
Geoscientists and Minerals Council of Australia (JORC).
Next Steps
As part of ongoing studies, AMC recommend that ten new
drillholes, twined to historical drillholes, should be drilled as
verification holes to support further mineral resource estimation
and classification. It is the intention of the Company to drill
these holes in summer 2023 to expediate the estimation of JORC-
compliant resources over the Verkhuba Deposit.
Upon conversion to JORC-compliant resources, East Star will be
able to undertake a Scoping Study on both the open pit and
underground development scenarios to confirm the potential
economics of the project. East Star hopes to complete and publish
the results of this work by the end of 2023.
The Company will abide by industry standard QA/QC protocols for
quality assurance and intend on conducting geotechnical logging on
all core for the purpose of saving time and money on the subsequent
stages of feasibility assessment.
Figure 2 Arial view of mineralisation with OP outline and
planned drillholes (yellow)
Rudny Altai Region
The Rudny Altai region is one of the largest VMS provinces in
the world, part of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. The Company's
newest 1794-EL, 1795-EL (containing the Verkhuba Deposit) and
1799-EL licences are located adjacent to the Company's existing
847-EL and 914-EL licences (together, the "Licences").
Administratively, the Licences are within the Shemonaikha District
and are extraordinarily well connected to infrastructure. The
regional centre of Ust-Kamenogorsk is located 45 km, and its
international airport is located 35 km, southeast of the Licences.
The railway connecting Ridder (Kazzinc Mine) and Tomsk cities
crosses the Licences from the south to the northwest with two
railway stations located on the territory of the Licences. There is
a network of dirt roads within the Licences that are suitable for
driving all year round. A hard-surfaced road from Ust-Kamenogorsk
to Shemonaikha crosses the western part of the Licences.
The area is characterised by moderately hilly terrain with
elevations ranging between 270 m and 630 m above the mean sea
level.
For further information visit the Company's website at
www.eaststarplc.com , or contact:
East Star Resources Plc
Alex Walker, Chief Executive Officer
Tel: +44 (0)20 7390 0234 (via Vigo Consulting)
Peterhouse Capital Limited (Corporate Broker)
Duncan Vasey / Lucy Williams
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7469 0930
Vigo Consulting (Investor Relations)
Ben Simons / Peter Jacob
Tel: +44 (0)20 7390 0234
About East Star Resources Plc
East Star Resources is focused on the discovery and development
of strategic minerals required for the energy revolution. With an
initial nine licences covering 1,321.5 km(2) in three mineral rich
districts of Kazakhstan, East Star is undertaking an intensive
exploration programme, applying modern geophysics to discover
minerals in levels that were not previously explored. The Company
also intends to further expand its licence portfolio in Kazakhstan.
East Star's management are based permanently on the ground,
supported by local expertise, and joint ventures with the state
mining company.
Follow us on social media:
LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/east-star-resources/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/EastStar_PLC
The person who arranged for the release of this announcement was
Alex Walker, CEO of the Company.
Competent Persons Statement
The information in this Report that relates to the Exploration
Target is based on and fairly represents information which has been
compiled by Mr Dmitry Pertel who is a member of the Australian
Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Pertel has sufficient experience
relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under
consideration and to the activity that is being undertaken to
qualify as a Competent Person, as defined in the 2012 Edition of
the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results,
Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves". Mr Pertel is a full-time
employee of AMC Consultants Pty Ltd..
The information in this Report that relates to QAQC (JORC Code
Table 1 Sections 1 and 2) is based on and fairly represents
information which has been compiled by Dr Mikhail Tsypukov who is a
Fellow of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (UK). Dr
Tsypukov has sufficient experience relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
activity that is being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person,
as defined in the 2012 Edition of the "Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves". Mr Tsypukov is an independent Consulting Geologist (not
associated with AMC) and has consented to the inclusion of the
matters in this report based on his information in the form and
context in which it appears.
JORC Table 1. Verkhuba Deposit
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)
Sampling Techniques ! Nature and quality of sampling (eg ! The deposit was explored by
cut channels, random chips, or drilling producing 59 and 76 mm
specific specialised industry diameter core. Sampling was
standard measurement tools appropriate performed only on mineralised
to the minerals under investigation, intervals identified by visual
such as down hole core logging and downhole
gamma sondes, or handheld XRF geophysics
instruments, etc). These examples (X-ray radiometric and/or
should not be taken as limiting electric downhole logging).
the broad meaning of sampling. ! Mineralised core of different
! Include reference to measures taken mineralogy was sampled separately
to ensure sample representivity and at intervals ranging from
the appropriate 0. 1 to 2.0 m in length.
calibration of any measurement tools ! 59 mm core was sampled in full,
or systems used. 76 mm core was cut in half, one
! Aspects of the determination of half of core was sampled
mineralisation that are Material to for laboratory studies.
the Public Report. ! Host rocks in hanging wall and
! In cases where 'industry standard' footwall of mineralisation were
work has been done this would be sampled by 1 m long samples,
relatively simple (eg 2-3 samples were collected from
'reverse circulation drilling was used each contact.
to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg ! Non-mineralised core was
was pulverised sampled by 10 m long composite
to produce a 30 g charge for fire core samples by collecting rock
assay'). In other cases, more chips every 10 cm of core for
explanation may be required, rock chemical and mineralogical
such as where there is coarse gold studies.
that has inherent sampling problems. ! In case of low core recovery
Unusual commodities (<50%) sampling intervals were
or mineralisation types (eg submarine increase to 3 m to provide enough
nodules) may warrant disclosure of sampling material for chemical
detailed information. studies.
In the opinion of the Competent
Person, the sampling techniques
were appropriate for the geology,
scale of deposit, and are of an
acceptable standard for the
purpose of data used in
estimating
an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Drilling Techniques ! Drill type (eg core, reverse ! Double barrel wireline system
circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary was used in Exploration Target
air blast, auger, Bangka, definition drilling.
sonic, etc) and details (eg core ! Upper 10-20 m transported
diameter, triple or standard tube, deposits were drilled by 132 mm
depth of diamond tails, diamond drill bit, followed by
face-sampling bit or other type, 112 mm bit up to depth of 35-70 m
whether core is oriented and if so, by below the surface. After casing
what method, etc). of drill hole by 89 mm casing
pipes, the drilling was continued
by 76 mm bit (core diameter 57
mm), followed by 59 mm drill
bit (core diameter 42 mm).
! Most of the mineralised
intervals were drilled with 59 mm
drill bits.
In the opinion of the Competent
Person, the drilling techniques
are suitable for estimating
Exploration Target: the core
sizes are appropriate, but the
standards of work completed in
the Soviet era should be
quantified and compared to the
planned verification drill
programme.
The data obtained using the older
drilling techniques is acceptable
for the definition of
an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Drill Sample Recovery ! Method of recording and assessing ! On undisturbed core, the
core and chip sample recoveries and recovery was estimated by
results assessed. dividing of core length by the
! Measures taken to maximise sample length
recovery and ensure representative of drilling run reduced to 100%.
nature of the samples. Most of the core was presented by
! Whether a relationship exists broken and fragmented core
between sample recovery and grade and and its recovery was measured
whether sample bias using weight method.
may have occurred due to preferential ! To increase core recovery on
loss/gain of fine/coarse material. mineralised intervals the length
of drilling runs was reduced
to 1 m and drill bit load was
also reduced.
! Core recovery on mineralised
intervals was reported above the
limit of 70% and above 60%
within the bioherm sequence.
! There were no requirements on
core recovery on non-mineralised
intervals and host rocks,
where core recovery varied within
23-40% (1987-1990).
! No relationship between sample
recovery and grade was reported
nor it was apparent.
In the opinion of the Competent
Person, the drill sample
recoveries are suitable for data
used in estimating an Exploration
Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Logging ! Whether core and chip samples have ! All drill holes were
been geologically and geotechnically geologically logged except upper
logged to a level sections of drill holes with
of detail to support appropriate transported
Mineral Resource estimation, mining sediments, however only limited
studies and metallurgical original information from
studies. geological archives has been
! Whether logging is qualitative or obtained
quantitative in nature. Core (or to date.
costean, channel, etc) ! No results of historical
photography. geotechnical logging are
! The total length and percentage of available.
the relevant intersections logged. ! Historical logging was
qualitative, in many cases rock
nomenclature is not confirmed by
rock chemistry and by other
exploration campaigns.
! No core photos were taken
during historical exploration.
In the opinion of the Competent
Person, the available geological
logging is sufficient to
support estimate of an
Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Sub-sampling Techniques and Sample ! If core, whether cut or sawn and ! 57 mm core was cut along the
Preparation whether quarter, half or all core core axe, half core subsamples
taken. were taken for control purposes.
! If non-core, whether riffled, tube 42 mm core was sampled in full, no
sampled, rotary split, etc and whether geological duplicates were
sampled wet or available for control purposes.
dry. ! Sample preparation was robust
! For all sample types, the nature, and included all necessary
quality and appropriateness of the procedures, including multiple
sample preparation crushing controlled by sieving,
technique. staged size reduction, pulverizing
! Quality control procedures adopted and collection of one analytical
for all sub-sampling stages to sample and three duplicates of
maximise representivity sufficient weight for analytical
of samples. studies.
! Measures taken to ensure that the ! Sample size was appropriate to
sampling is representative of the in the grain size of the sampling
situ material collected, material.
including for instance results for The Competent Person's opinion
field duplicate/second-half sampling. that the subsampling techniques
! Whether sample sizes are appropriate and sample preparation were
to the grain size of the material suitable for data used in
being sampled. estimating an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Quality of assay data and laboratory ! The nature, quality and ! Atomic absorption spectral
tests appropriateness of the assaying and analysis was used for
laboratory procedures used and determination of Cu, Pb and Zn.
whether the technique is considered Fire assay
partial or total. analysis with atomic absorption
! For geophysical tools, finish was use for determination
spectrometers, handheld XRF of Au and Ag.
instruments, etc, the parameters used ! Analytical test results for Cu,
in determining the analysis including Pb and Zn on main and duplicate
instrument make and model, reading samples performed in main
times, calibrations and umpire laboratories
factors applied and their derivation, demonstrated discrepancy within
etc. the acceptable limits.
! Nature of quality control procedures ! There is no available
adopted (eg standards, blanks, information on internal QAQC
duplicates, external procedures in main and umpire
laboratory checks) and whether laboratories.
acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack The Competent Person is satisfied
of bias) and precision that the overall quality of the
have been established. assay results is acceptable
and fit for the purpose of
estimating an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Verification of Sampling and Assaying ! The verification of significant ! No verification drilling has
intersections by either independent or been performed by ESR at this
alternative company stage.
personnel. ! No twinning of historical drill
! The use of twinned holes. holes was performed by ESR.
! Documentation of primary data, data ! Limited primary historical data
entry procedures, data verification, as core lithological and
data storage (physical structural logs, drill hole
and electronic) protocols. inclination
! Discuss any adjustment to assay etc. is available by the time of
data. preparation of the report.
! Location of mineralised
intervals can be corrected after
obtaining of historical
topographic
survey results, drill hole logs
and on-site inspection.
No control or verification results
were available at the time of
reporting; thus estimated
grades and tonnes were not
classified.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Location of Data Points ! Accuracy and quality of surveys used ! Location and deviation of
to locate drill holes (collar and historical drill holes was
down-hole surveys), digitised from georeferenced
trenches, mine workings and other geological
locations used in Mineral Resource sections and maps at scale
estimation. 1:10,000, which is considered as
! Specification of the grid system appropriate for Exploration Target
used. mineral inventory.
! Quality and adequacy of topographic ! By the time of preparation of
control. the report no historical drill
hole logs with collar coordinates
were available. ESR is in the
process of obtaining this
information from geological
archives.
! Topography of the deposit area
was presented as digital terrane
model with sufficient resolution
which is considered as appropriate
for Exploration Target mineral
inventory.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that the location of data points
is fit for the purpose
of estimating an Exploration
Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Data Spacing and Distribution ! Data spacing for reporting of ! Data spacing is appropriate for
Exploration Results. delineation of Exploration Target
! Whether the data spacing and assessment of volume of
distribution is sufficient to mineralised material and metal
establish the degree of geological endowment and grades.
and grade continuity appropriate for ! Historical data spacing and
the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve distribution is sufficient to
estimation procedure(s) establish mineralised bodies,
and classifications applied. continuity of lithology and grade
! Whether sample compositing has been appropriate for delineation of
applied. Exploration Target. Verification
drilling and twinning of some
drill holes are required for
subsequent Mineral Resource
Estimate
in Inferred and Indicated
categories.
! Exploration grid includes 97
diamond holes drilled with 200 m
by 200 m to 100 m by 100 m
spacing.
! Most mineralised zones do not
outcrop, but some of them do
outcrop. Mineralised bodies were
traced to a depth exceeding 800 m
from the surface, using adit
levels and inclined core
drillholes.
Drillholes were located along the
profiles, oriented across the
mineralised bodies strike,
the profiles strike at 100-105 .
The Competent Person is satisfied
that data spacing is appropriate
for estimating an Exploration
Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Orientation of Data in relation to ! Whether the orientation of sampling ! Most of the drill holes were
Geological Structure achieves unbiased sampling of possible sub-vertical, intersecting of
structures and flat lying lithology at steep
the extent to which this is known, angles. Thus, no correction of
considering the deposit type. width of mineralised
! If the relationship between the intersections was applied which
drilling orientation and the is considered
orientation of key mineralised as appropriate to the considered
structures is considered to have deposit type.
introduced a sampling bias, this ! The sampling orientation was
should be assessed and reported appropriate for the reliable
if material. sampling of the identified
structures,
considering the mineralisation
type.
! Drilling profiles were oriented
across the mineralisation.
! The flat lying mineralised
bodies were sampled by inclined
or vertical drillholes, oriented
across the mineralised zone
strike.
! Sampling bias from the
orientation of the drilling was
not identified.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that orientation of data in
relation to geological structure
is appropriate for estimating an
Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Sample Security ! The measures taken to ensure sample ! Not appropriate. All historical core
security. and laboratory samples were disposed
of shortly after
completion of exploration programmes.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Audits or Reviews ! The results of any audits or reviews ! As far as Competent Person aware,
of sampling techniques and data. there were no audits or reviews of
sampling techniques
and data related to Verkhuba deposit
performed by any third party.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this
section)
Mineral ! Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including ! Verkhuba deposit is located in the eastern part of exploration licence 1795-EL, owned by
Tenement and agreements or material issues Discovery Ventures Kazakhstan Ltd. The licence was issued on 27 July 2022 for initial period
Land Tenure with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, of 6 years with a possibility of further five years extension subject to reduction of the
Status overriding royalties, native title licence area by 40%. The licence has an area of 37.1 km(2) and contains VHMS deposits Pokrovskoe-2
interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and (mined out in 1960-1970(th) ) and Verkhuba and several VHMS occurrences. No native title interests,
environmental settings. historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental setting identified by ESR
! The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along appointed environmental consultants.
with any known impediments ! Discovery Ventures Kazakhstan Ltd is a 100% owned entity of East Star Resources.
to obtaining a licence to operate in the area. ! Ministry of Industry and Infrastructural Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan does
not carry any negotiations with any other party in respect of the property. All required documents
including Exploration programme, Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and enhanced technical
and economic calculations studies are completed by ESR and approved by the Kazakhstan mining
authorities allowing ESR to perform exploration on the property.
! According to Kazakh mining legislation, exploration licence can be converted to mining licence
after completion of exploration in case the applicants is compliance with qualification requirements
of Subsoil Use Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The Competent Person is satisfied that mineral tenement and land tenure status are appropriate
for Exploration Target estimation.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exploration ! Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. ! The deposit was discovered in 1948-1949 during geological survey at scale 1:50,000 of topographic
done by other sheets M-44-57-D and M-44-69-B (Yakovlev et al., 1950)
parties ! Several exploration campaigns through 1950-1990s were carried out within the deposit area
by East Kazakhstan Geological Enterprise mostly by surface core drilling:
o 1956-1957 ( Yusupov et al., 1957 );
o 1970-1972 ( Anoshin et al., 1973);
o 1974-1976 (Rodionov et al., 1976);
o 1985-1987 (Radchenko et al., 1 987);
o 1987-1990 (Grigorovich et al., 1990);
! Exploration adit and drives totalling 3001 m were also developed at the deposit, but the
database for underground channel sampling and metallurgical sampling was not available.
! Historical exploration was completed in 1990 by Technical Economic Consideration supported
by Mineral Resource Estimate (Yermolaev et al., 1990).
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geology ! Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. ! Verkhuba polymetallic deposit belongs to volcanogenic hosted massive sulphide deposit type
(VHMS), formed in Devonian time within Rudny Altai VHMS province as a result of hydrothermal
activity in the vicinity of spreading centre or subduction zone.
! Mineralised bodies are represented by shallow dipping thin sheet-like bodies and lenses
hosted mainly by volcanogenic sedimentary rocks including, tuffaceous siltstone and sandstone,
marl, carbonate rock, felsic tuff and lava.
! Mineralisation is considered as a distal to a volcanic centre due to significant amount
of sedimentary rocks. Mineralised bodies are controlled by a contact of Berezovskaya and Losishinskaya
suites (Eifelian-Frasnian stages) and are represented by disseminated, string and massive
Cu-Zn mineralisation.
The Competent Person is satisfied that geological understanding of this deposit is appropriate
to support Exploration Target estimation.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drill hole ! A summary of all information material to the ! Verkhuba VHMS deposit had been explored by sub-vertical or steeply dipping drill holes that
Information understanding of the exploration results including provided a grid of ca. 100x100 m in the central part of the deposit and 200x100 m on its flanks.
a tabulation of the following information for all Material ! The area studied by drilling is approximately 1.7 x 1.7 km and contains 97 drill holes,
drill holes: totalling 42,178 m. The drill holes varied in length from 120 to 893 m (average length of
* easting and northing of the drill hole collar 434 m).
! Polymetallic mineralisation was intersected on several stratigraphic levels at depth from
to 13.5 to 849 m below the surface.
* elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea ! Information on historical drilling, including collar coordinates, drill hole inclination
level in metres) of the drill hole collar and length was extracted by ESR from georeferenced geology maps and geological sections at
scale 1:10 000. Depth of mineralised intervals and grades were taken from historical mineral
resource estimate reports (Ermolaev et al., 1990, Grigorovich et al., 1990) and require verification
* dip and azimuth of the hole and correction during the follow-up exploration and delineation of JORC Code-compliant Mineral
Resources.
! A table of drill hole collars and relevant mineralised intersections is presented in the
* down hole length and interception depth report.
! All the available geological information has been included into the report.
* hole length.
! If the exclusion of this information is justified on the
basis that the information is not
Material and this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent
Person should clearly explain why this is the case.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data ! In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging ! Exploration results are not the subject of this report.
Aggregation techniques, maximum and/or minimum ! The following metal equivalent calculations were used:
Methods grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades No metallurgical metal recoveries were not applied in the metal equivalent formula dues to
are usually Material and the conceptual nature of the estimate of Exploration Target.
should be stated. Copper equivalent was calculated using conversion factor of 0.3389 for zinc and 0.2500 for
! Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high lead. Metal prices used were 9,000 US$/t for copper, 3,050 US$/t for zinc and 2,250 US$/t
grade results and longer lengths for lead.
of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation The resultant formula was: CuEq = Cu(%) + Zn(%) x 0.33889 + Pb(%) x 0.250000
should be stated and some typical Where: CuEq - copper equivalent (%), Zn - in situ zinc grade (%), Cu - in situ copper grade
examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. (%), Pb - in situ lead grade (%).
! The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent The Competent Person is satisfied that appropriate data aggregation methods have been applied
values should be clearly stated. to support Exploration Target estimation.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relationship ! These relationships are particularly important in the ! Exploration results are not the subject of this report.
between reporting of Exploration Results. ! No true thickness of mineralisation has been calculated in the current study.
Mineralisation ! If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the ! Relationships between thickness of mineralisation and length of intercepts were interpreted
widths and drill hole angle is known, its during historical exploration by core observations and correlation of lithology and mineralisation
intercept nature should be reported. between adjacent drill holes confirming flat lying stratigraphy and polymetallic mineralisation
lengths ! If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are concordant to layering.
reported, there should be a clear ! According to historical reports most of drill holes were steeply dipping or sub-vertical
statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not and intersected mineralisation at steep angle so it is assumed that the width of mineralised
known'). intervals in most drill holes is close to true thickness of mineralisation.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagrams ! Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of ! Historical geology maps and sections at scale 1:10,000 are included into the report as well
intercepts should be included as and most significant historical mineral intersections.
for any significant discovery being reported These should
include, but not be limited to a
plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate
sectional views.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balanced ! Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is ! Mineral inventory presented in the report is based on historical drilling results including
Reporting not practicable, representative both barren and mineralised drill holes.
reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be ! All material historical exploration results and conclusions in which the authors are confident
practiced to avoid misleading in are reported, as well as main concerns related to continuation of mineralisation.
reporting of Exploration Results.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other ! Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be ! Based on historical drilling results, a Technical-Economic Consideration supported by a
Substantive reported including (but not historical mineral resource estimate was produced by Ermolaev et al.(1990). The historical
Exploration limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey resource estimate considered three cut-off grades 3.0, 2.0 and 0.8% sum of metals (Zn equivalent),
Data results; geochemical survey results; minimal thickness of mineralised bodies as 1.6 m and maximal thickness of barren rocks included
bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test into the mineralised interval - 3 m. Results of the estimate are presented in table below.Cut-off Ore Cu Pb Zn Cu Pb Zn Au Ag
results; bulk density, groundwater, grade
geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or % Kt % % % Kt Kt Kt t t
contaminating substances. 3.0 2,714 1.84 0.27 4.65 49.90 7.41 126.25 0.81 38.50
2.0 5,445 1.34 0.22 3.19 74.62 4.73 173.94 1.66 77.30
0.8 10,897 1.14 0.14 1.91 124.22 15.68 208.54 3.27 154.70
------- ------ ---- ---- ---- ------ ----- ------ ---- ------
! Au and Ag resources were calculated based on Au and Ag grade in technological sample 4 equal
to 0.4 g/t Au, 14.2 g/t Ag.
! Au and Ag recovery to concentrates was below 50%:Cut-off Cu concentrate Zn concentrate Pyrite Tailings
grade concentrate
% Au Ag Au Ag Au Ag Au Ag
3.0 11.15 51.93 15.5 31.26 15.37 4.7 57.98 12.17
2.0 8.29 38.5 12.8 21.45 15.81 27.24 63.82 12.81
0.8 6.89 31.96 6.28 11.2 23.78 43.5 63.05 13.34
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------ ------ ----- -----
! Bulk density for mineralised material was estimated as 3.0 t/m(3) based on 500 samples collected
from drill core and underground channels.
! It was concluded by Ermolaev et al. (1990) that the mining could be profitable with 3 %
of sum of metals as a cut-off grade in accordance with economic conditions and costs of 1990.
! According to Yermolaev et al. (1990), total of 9 metallurgical tests were performed on Verkhuba
mineralised material by Central Laboratory of East Kazakhstan Geological Expedition (Vostkazgeologia)
and All Union Scientific Institute (VNIIzvetmet, Ust-Kamenogorsk, 1989) . The 9 individual
and composite samples differed in ore mineralogy and varied in weight from 14 to 1500 kg.
Several treatment sc hemes were applied producing Cu, Pb, Zn and pyrite concentrate with the
recovery varying within 86-96% (Cu), 75-85% (Pb), 75-94% (Zn), 48-60 (pyrite). Based on test
results it was recommended to use bulk-differential flotation which provide 83-84% Cu and
Zn recovery to concentrates.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further Work ! The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for ! ESR intends to verify continuity and grades of mineralisation and perform metallurgical
lateral extensions or depth extensions test work, hydrogeological and geotechnical and other appropriate studies.
or large-scale step-out drilling). ! Model geology of the deposit using results of verification and infill drilling and whole
! Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible rock geochemistry.
extensions, including the main geological ! Produce JORC compliant Mineral Resource Estimate at Indicated and Inferred categories by
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this completion of field and laboratory programme.
information is not commercially sensitive. The Competent Person is satisfied that the proposed work is appropriate to support subsequent
objectives.
-------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
(Criteria listed in Section 1, and where relevant in Section 2,
also apply to this section)
AMC comments that this section is provided to support some
aspects of the determination of the Exploration Target. It is not
strictly required for public reporting of an Exploration Target nor
are all items applicable to an Exploration Target. AMC provides
this information for the purposes of transparency and
materiality.
Database Integrity ! Measures taken to ensure that data This relates only to the
has not been corrupted by, for estimation of an Exploration
example, transcription Target which is conceptual in
or keying errors, between its initial nature.
collection and its use for Mineral A database with 97 diamond holes
Resource estimation was used for estimation of
purposes. Exploration Target of the
! Data validation procedures used. deposit.
The historical database was
created based on previous
studies, in accordance with the
mining
industry regulations of the USSR
and Russia.
All historical drilling results
were entered into electronic
database in Excel format.
The following error checks were
carried out during the final
database creation:
! Missing collar coordinates
! Missing values in fields FROM
and TO
! Cases when FROM values equal or
exceed TO ones (FROM>=TO)
! Data availability. The data
availability was checked for each
drillhole in the tables:
! Collar coordinates
! Sampling data
! Downhole survey data
! Lithological characteristics
! Duplicate drillhole numbers in
the table of the drillhole collar
coordinates.
! Duplicate sampling intervals
! Duplicate downhole measurement
data
! Duplicate intervals of the
lithological column
! Sample "overlapping" (when the
sample TO value exceeds FROM
value of the next sample).
! Negative-grade samples.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that database integrity is
appropriate to support
Exploration
Target estimation.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Site Visits ! Comment on any site visits ! No site visit was deemed necessary
undertaken by the Competent Person and for determination of an Exploration
the outcome of those visits. Target.
! If no site visits have been
undertaken indicate why this is the
case.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Geological Interpretation ! Confidence in (or conversely, the This relates only to the
uncertainty of ) the geological estimation of an Exploration
interpretation of the Target which is conceptual in
mineral deposit. nature.
! Nature of the data used and of any The interpretation of the
assumptions made. mineralised structures was based
! The effect, if any, of alternative on geological logging and metal
interpretations on Mineral Resource equivalent grades, and also used
estimation. scanned and georeferenced
! The use of geology in guiding and historical geological cross
controlling Mineral Resource sections.
estimation. Different metals were not
! The factors affecting continuity interpreted separately. ESR
both of grade and geology. supplied AMC with the validated
database,
topography surface and scanned
cross sections with interpreted
geology of the deposit and
mineralised bodies.
There is a reasonable level of
confidence in the geological
interpretation of the main
mineralised
bodies is traceable over a number
of drillholes and drill sections.
Drillhole intercepts with
geological logging, assay results
and structural interpretations
have formed the basis for the
geological interpretation.
Interpretation of the main
polymetallic mineralised
envelopes forms the basis for
modelling.
0.5% Zn equivalent was used to
interpret polymetallic
mineralisation.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that the geological
interpretation is appropriate to
support
determination of an Exploration
Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Dimensions ! The extent and variability of the This relates only to the
Mineral Resource expressed as length estimation of an Exploration
(along strike or Target which is conceptual in
otherwise), plan width, and depth nature.
below surface to the upper and lower 59 sheet-like flat-lying
limits of the Mineral mineralised bodies were
Resource. interpreted and modelled at the
deposit.
All modelled bodies vary in size.
The largest one is over 1,100 m
along strike and over 1,000
m across strike with an average
thickness of about 2 m. All other
bodies are smaller with
the length along and across
strike of about 100 to 200 m. The
depth below surface varies from
0 m to 800 m.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that the dimensions interpreted
are appropriate to support
determination of an Exploration
Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Estimation and Modelling Techniques ! The nature and appropriateness of This relates only to the
the estimation technique(s) applied estimation of an Exploration
and key assumptions, Target which is conceptual in
including treatment of extreme grade nature.
values, domaining, interpolation A preliminary block model was
parameters and maximum based on surface diamond drill
distance of extrapolation from data core using ordinary kriging (OK)
points. If a computer assisted to form 5 x 5 x 5 m blocks. The
estimation method was chosen block model was constrained by
include a description of computer wireframes modelled using
software and parameters used. sectional
! The availability of check estimates, interpretation at a nominal 0.5%
previous estimates and/or mine ZnEq wireframing cut-off grade
production records and for mineralisation.
whether the Mineral Resource estimate All parameters and estimates
takes appropriate account of such supporting the Exploration Target
data. are preliminary.
! The assumptions made regarding The Competent Person is satisfied
recovery of by-products. that estimation and modelling
! Estimation of deleterious elements techniques are appropriate
or other non-grade variables of to support Exploration Target
economic significance estimation.
(eg sulphur for acid mine drainage
characterisation).
! In the case of block model
interpolation, the block size in
relation to the average sample
spacing and the search employed.
! Any assumptions behind modelling of
selective mining units.
! Any assumptions about correlation
between variables.
! Description of how the geological
interpretation was used to control the
resource estimates.
! Discussion of basis for using or not
using grade cutting or capping.
! The process of validation, the
checking process used, the comparison
of model data to drill
hole data, and use of reconciliation
data if available.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Moisture ! Whether the tonnages are estimated This relates only to the
on a dry basis or with natural estimation of an Exploration
moisture, and the method Target which is conceptual in
of determination of the moisture nature.
content. Moisture was not considered in
the bulk density assignment and
all tonnage estimates were
based on dry tonnes.
The Competent Person accepts that
moisture was not considered due
to the conceptual nature
of an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Cut-off Parameters ! The basis of the adopted cut-off This relates only to the
grade(s) or quality parameters estimation of an Exploration
applied. Target which is conceptual in
nature.
Nominal cut-off grades of 0.38%
CuEq and 0.86% CuEq (copper
equivalent) were used to report
the Exploration target for open
pit and underground mining
methods respectively.
Cut-off grades were based on open
pit and underground mining
methods, according to an ESR's
in-house estimates of unit costs
and using metal's spot prices at
the day of reporting. Copper
equivalent was calculated using
the following metal prices: 3,050
US$/t for Zn, 9,000 US$/t
for Cu, 2,250 US$/t for Pb.
The Competent Person is satisfied
that cut-off parameters were
appropriately considered, to
support an Exploration Target.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Mining Factors or Assumptions ! Assumptions made regarding possible This relates only to the
mining methods, minimum mining estimation of an Exploration
dimensions and internal Target which is conceptual in
(or, if applicable, external) mining nature.
dilution. It is always necessary as Mining is assumed to be by open
part of the process pit and underground methods.
of determining reasonable prospects Mining losses were assumed to
for eventual economic extraction to be 5% and mining dilution was
consider potential assumed 5% for open pit mining,
mining methods, but the assumptions and 10% dilution was assumed
made regarding mining methods and for underground mining method.
parameters when estimating
Mineral Resources may not always be
rigorous. Where this is the case, this
should be reported
with an explanation of the basis of
the mining assumptions made.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Metallurgical Factors or Assumptions ! The basis for assumptions or This relates only to the
predictions regarding metallurgical estimation of an Exploration
amenability. It is always Target which is conceptual in
necessary as part of the process of nature.
determining reasonable prospects for No material assumptions are
eventual economic considered at this stage.
extraction to consider potential The Competent Person is satisfied
metallurgical methods, but the that conceptual metallurgical
assumptions regarding metallurgical factors and assumptions were
treatment processes and parameters appropriately considered to
made when reporting Mineral Resources support Exploration Target
may not always be estimation.
rigorous. Where this is the case, this
should be reported with an explanation
of the basis
of the metallurgical assumptions made.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Environmental Factors or Assumptions ! Assumptions made regarding possible This relates only to the
waste and process residue disposal estimation of an Exploration
options. It is always Target which is conceptual in
necessary as part of the process of nature.
determining reasonable prospects for No environmental factors or
eventual economic assumptions were made.
extraction to consider the potential
environmental impacts of the mining
and processing operation.
While at this stage the determination
of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for
a greenfields project, may not always
be well advanced, the status of early
consideration
of these potential environmental
impacts should be reported. Where
these aspects have not
been considered this should be
reported with an explanation of the
environmental assumptions
made.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Bulk Density ! Whether assumed or determined. If This relates only to the
assumed, the basis for the estimation of an Exploration
assumptions. If determined, Target which is conceptual in
the method used, whether wet or dry, nature.
the frequency of the measurements, the A nominal bulk density of 3.0
nature, size and t/m(3) was used for the
representativeness of the samples. Exploration Target based on
! The bulk density for bulk material historical
must have been measured by methods data.
that adequately account The Competent Person is not aware
for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), of the nature and quality of the
moisture and differences between rock historical bulk measurement
and alteration methods and quality. However, the
zones within the deposit. applied value is considered
! Discuss assumptions for bulk density reasonable for the purposes
estimates used in the evaluation of Exploration target reporting.
process of the different
materials.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Classification ! The basis for the classification of This relates only to the
the Mineral Resources into varying estimation of an Exploration
confidence categories. Target which is conceptual in
! Whether appropriate account has been nature.
taken of all relevant factors (ie No classification was applied to
relative confidence Exploration Target estimate.
in tonnage/grade estimations,
reliability of input data, confidence
in continuity of geology
and metal values, quality, quantity
and distribution of the data).
! Whether the result appropriately
reflects the Competent Person's view
of the deposit.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Audits or Reviews ! The results of any audits or reviews This relates only to the
of Mineral Resource estimates estimation of an Exploration
Target which is conceptual in
nature.
The Exploration Target estimate
was reviewed internally by Ingvar
Kirchner, who is employed
by AMC as a Geology Manager /
Principal Geologist, who
concluded that the procedures
used
to estimate the Exploration
Target are appropriate.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Discussion of Relative Accuracy / ! Where appropriate a statement of the This relates only to the
Confidence relative accuracy and confidence level estimation of an Exploration
in the Mineral Target which is conceptual in
Resource estimate using an approach or nature.
procedure deemed appropriate by the This is not relevant to reporting
Competent Person. of an Exploration Target.
For example, the application of
statistical or geostatistical
procedures to quantify the relative
accuracy of the resource within stated
confidence limits, or, if such an
approach is not deemed
appropriate, a qualitative discussion
of the factors that could affect the
relative accuracy
and confidence of the estimate.
! The statement should specify whether
it relates to global or local
estimates, and, if local,
state the relevant tonnages, which
should be relevant to technical and
economic evaluation.
Documentation should include
assumptions made and the procedures
used.
! These statements of relative
accuracy and confidence of the
estimate should be compared
with production data, where available.
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the
London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct
Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United
Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution
of this information may apply. For further information, please
contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.
RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms
and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information
contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an
anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services.
For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange
use the personal data you provide us, please see our Privacy
Policy.
END
UPDVBLFLXXLZBBB
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
March 21, 2023 03:00 ET (07:00 GMT)
East Star Resources (LSE:EST)
Historical Stock Chart
From Feb 2024 to Mar 2024
East Star Resources (LSE:EST)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2023 to Mar 2024