VAUGHN,
Could you please define what you mean by "bullseye targets." Does that mean they think there's a greater chance of hitting a pipe than the average drill hole? I never heard that expression before. If so, is their assurance based on geophysics, or what? Did Diamet have "bullseye" targets that turned out to be diamondiferous kimberlite?
My limited understanding of Snap Lake and Back Lake is that the mineral train goes to the Camsell Lake property and that there is much less likelihood of pipes on the SUF property. I own both stocks, so I'd be pleased as punch if both SUF and WSP hit pipes, but what have you heard about the geology of Back Lake?
About Alberta, I spoke with Pattick Powers of Montello last week, and he indicated that they had rejected a JV offer from Ashton, and that Ashton was likely to announce positive results from their drilling samples, which is probably why he rejected their offer which was, if I recall correctly, something like $50,000 up front, $7 mil in exploration, and Ashton gets 70%. He's either a good bullshitter, or there's something there. I think I'll hang on to my MEO shares for a couple weeks and see how it plays out.
From everything I've read and heard about Aber, I think you're way off on your analysis of them. It seems to me that they're very undervalued and that they won't have that much trouble working out the engineering. As for political and legal problems, Aber stands to produce about 5% of the world's diamonds, if I heard right, and I think it's in Canada's and NWT's best interest to see that they get the mine going.
Ketchup |
