SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: C L who wrote (343)11/5/1996 3:52:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed   of 35569
 
CL: This is exactly the argument I had on the GPGI thread with Ole 49er. I personally believe that the industry should develop two separate standards, an assaying standard and a recovery rate standard. The assay standard should be very simply X-ray fluorescence or scattering both of which yield all atoms concentrations with an atomic number above neon. Then, each company, while developing their ores should develop a precious metals recovery standard which is a function of various recovery methods applied to their specific ores. Then you compare the assaying standard (and it should always be higher than the recovery standard) to the recovery standard to see first, how economical is the recovery and what science could do too improve it. Valuation of companies should be based on the recovery rather than the assaying standard.

Zeev
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News