Mayfair Gold Presents the Initial Results from the 2025 Grade Control Drilling Program at the Fenn-Gib Project
The Grade Control Program comprised 56 diamond drill holes totaling approximately 4,200 metres. All holes were drilled vertically on a 10 m x 10 m spacing pattern to a target depth of 75 metres. The program was completed within the core of the Phase 1 starter pit and represents roughly one million tonnes of material anticipated to form part of the initial plant feed once construction is complete.
The objective of the program was to simulate grade control drilling and provide additional data to support delineation of the near‑surface portion of the orebody. This news release reports results from 36 of the 56 drill holes; assays for the remaining holes are pending.
These results are considered interim in nature until all data from the complete Program is received and all QAQC results have been verified. No conclusions are being drawn currently regarding potential impacts on the overall mineral resource estimate or mine plan. In addition, the drill results disclosed herein were not incorporated into the Company's 2026 Pre-Feasibility Study, published on
According to
The objectives of the Grade Control Program were to:
- Validate near‑surface grade distribution and ore geometry using closely spaced grade‑control drilling
- Compare drilling results directly against the existing resource block model to assess local grade variability
- Improve definition of ore–waste boundaries to support efficient mining (i.e., reduce dilution and metal‑loss in both planning and operations)
- Increase confidence in grades and production during the ramp-up and early years of operations
- Contribute to broader strategy of de‑risking the Project following the PFS
- Enhance confidence for potential lenders as part of the Fenn-Gib project financing
The following figures illustrate the general location of the Program within the initial starter pit
(Interim) Grade Control Program Drill Data
The data presented provides a direct comparison between the intervals drilled during the Grade Control Program and those predicted by the current mineral resource block model.
Figure 1: Comparison of Grade Control and Block Model Results
|
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
|
(4) |
(5) |
|||
|
Hole-ID
|
Grade Control |
|
|
Grade Control Program |
Block |
|||
|
Total |
Au |
Au |
|
Length (m) |
Au
Capped |
Length (m) |
Au (g/t) |
|
|
|
Au > 0.0 g/t |
|
Au >= 0.80 |
|||||
|
MRE-FG25-001 |
63 |
0.93 |
1.14 |
|
24 |
1.78 |
39 |
1.53 |
|
MRE-FG25-002 |
70 |
1.42 |
1.23 |
|
37 |
2.21 |
52 |
1.49 |
|
MRE-FG25-003 |
64 |
1.54 |
1.07 |
|
43 |
2.06 |
41 |
1.35 |
|
MRE-FG25-004 |
66 |
1.02 |
1.18 |
|
41 |
1.42 |
41 |
1.65 |
|
MRE-FG25-005 |
64 |
1.17 |
2.22 |
|
35 |
2.06 |
51 |
2.63 |
|
MRE-FG25-006 |
64 |
0.92 |
1.23 |
|
15 |
2.22 |
46 |
1.58 |
|
MRE-FG25-007 |
63 |
0.99 |
1.51 |
|
31 |
1.47 |
46 |
1.93 |
|
MRE-FG25-008 |
62 |
0.90 |
0.95 |
|
11 |
2.78 |
36 |
1.24 |
|
MRE-FG25-009 |
63 |
0.89 |
1.00 |
|
31 |
1.32 |
36 |
1.45 |
|
MRE-FG25-010 |
66 |
1.08 |
1.14 |
|
31 |
1.86 |
41 |
1.52 |
|
MRE-FG25-011 |
66 |
0.74 |
1.20 |
|
25 |
1.24 |
46 |
1.45 |
|
MRE-FG25-012 |
65 |
1.42 |
0.92 |
|
26 |
2.92 |
41 |
1.22 |
|
MRE-FG25-013 |
64 |
2.54 |
0.92 |
|
36 |
4.16 |
46 |
1.07 |
|
MRE-FG25-014 |
65 |
1.75 |
1.51 |
|
51 |
2.13 |
46 |
1.97 |
|
MRE-FG25-015a |
62 |
0.90 |
1.41 |
|
25 |
1.58 |
51 |
1.61 |
|
MRE-FG25-016 |
66 |
0.91 |
1.25 |
|
31 |
1.47 |
51 |
1.48 |
|
MRE-FG25-017 |
66 |
0.71 |
1.07 |
|
25 |
1.09 |
46 |
1.27 |
|
MRE-FG25-018 |
66 |
1.46 |
1.15 |
|
36 |
2.32 |
51 |
1.32 |
|
MRE-FG25-019 |
64 |
0.84 |
1.72 |
|
31 |
1.32 |
51 |
1.99 |
|
MRE-FG25-020 |
64 |
0.93 |
1.55 |
|
31 |
1.56 |
41 |
2.16 |
|
MRE-FG25-021 |
65 |
1.60 |
1.37 |
|
35 |
2.57 |
55 |
1.51 |
|
MRE-FG25-022 |
64 |
1.39 |
1.59 |
|
43 |
1.78 |
64 |
1.59 |
|
MRE-FG25-023 |
66 |
0.81 |
1.45 |
|
25 |
1.32 |
51 |
1.70 |
|
MRE-FG25-024 |
66 |
2.02 |
1.64 |
|
50 |
2.60 |
61 |
1.71 |
|
MRE-FG25-025 |
66 |
3.09 |
2.08 |
|
51 |
3.83 |
51 |
2.55 |
|
MRE-FG25-026 |
66 |
0.93 |
1.00 |
|
35 |
1.29 |
51 |
1.13 |
|
MRE-FG25-027 |
66 |
1.40 |
2.01 |
|
56 |
1.53 |
56 |
2.25 |
|
MRE-FG25-028 |
66 |
1.50 |
1.84 |
|
45 |
1.93 |
61 |
1.93 |
|
MRE-FG25-029a |
66 |
1.51 |
1.38 |
|
45 |
1.96 |
66 |
1.38 |
|
MRE-FG25-030 |
66 |
1.21 |
1.49 |
|
35 |
1.85 |
56 |
1.64 |
|
MRE-FG25-031 |
66 |
1.92 |
1.24 |
|
56 |
2.14 |
61 |
1.28 |
|
MRE-FG25-032 |
66 |
4.25 |
1.98 |
|
56 |
4.92 |
56 |
2.23 |
|
MRE-FG25-033 |
66 |
2.25 |
2.17 |
|
61 |
2.37 |
61 |
2.31 |
|
MRE-FG25-035 |
66 |
3.02 |
1.52 |
|
51 |
3.80 |
41 |
2.00 |
|
MRE-FG25-036 |
66 |
1.51 |
1.16 |
|
40 |
2.11 |
50 |
1.29 |
|
MRE-FG25-041 |
66 |
1.24 |
0.90 |
|
45 |
1.54 |
36 |
1.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
2,355 |
1.47 |
1.40 |
|
1358 |
2.21 |
1788 |
1.68 |
|
NOTE: All grade data based on 5m composites, thereby allowing for comparing of Grade Control Program diamond drill holes to the 5m resource block model
|
||||||||
How to read the table and data format:
- Each row shows one 75m vertical drill hole from the grade‑control program and compares what the assayed grades against the 2026 PFS resource block model grade along the same path. The data is summarized into 5‑metre composites to allow for direct comparison against the 5m resource model block height.
- Comparing the in-rock portion of the drilled holes (column (2)) against the average grade reported over the same interval in the resource block model (Column (3)), the results show a modest increase in average grade (1.47g/t vs 1.40 g/t).
- When applying a cut-off grade of 0.8 g/t, the program indicates higher grades over somewhat shorter lengths (column (4)) versus the block model (column (5)) (1,358m @ 2.21 g/t vs. 1,788m @ 1.68 g/t).
- It should be noted that, while the Grade Control Program reports higher average grades over shorter mineralized intervals above the 0.8 g/t Au cutoff, the resulting grade–length product is broadly consistent with that predicted by the block model.
No conclusions are to be drawn from the Program until final assay results from the remaining 20 of the 56 drill holes are received and all QA/QC procedures have been completed.
QA/QC
Drill core selected for analysis was cut longitudinally using a diamond‑blade saw. One half of the core was retained in the core box for reference, and the other half was bagged, sealed, and prepared for shipment. Analytical work was completed by
Samples were delivered directly to
All holes in the program were drilled fully vertical (-90° dip) and true thickness is not estimated.
Additional Disclosure Related to Investor Relations and Communication Advisory Services
The Company previously disclosed agreements with several investor relations and capital markets consultants. As per exchange requirements additional details are being provided herein.
Mayfair has entered into an agreement with
Mayfair has entered into an agreement with
About
The content of this news release has been reviewed on behalf of the Company and approved by
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information
This news release contains certain forward-looking information and forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities legislation (collectively "forward-looking Information"). The use of the words "will" and "expected" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking information. This information includes statements that trading is expected to commence on the NYSE American on
Neither the
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mayfair-gold-presents-the-initial-results-from-the-2025-grade-control-drilling-program-at-the-fenn-gib-project-302684697.html
SOURCE