Kensington Resources Ltd. (V.KRT) * Diamond in the rough! Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Kensington Resources Ltd. (V.KRT) * Diamond in the rough!

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Falcon095 who wrote (4913)	8/1/2000 12:34:29 AM
From: Wallof Confusion	Read Replies (2) of 5206

I'm not sure of the implications of this statement . . . In 1999, De Beers recovered macrodiamonds from tailings produced by non-De Beers Laboratories, which were previously thought to have been adequately tested. Through the careful audit of X-ray tailings, De Beers have also identified a population of diamonds at Fort a la Corne, which have unusually low luminescent properties. These exercises have confirmed the efficiency and quality of the De Beers treatment and recovery facilities. I take it to mean that De Beers discovered that inadequate results were obtained by a "non-De Beers" Lab when tailings were re-examined and macrodiamonds were found. The section I really need help with is the "low luminescent properties". Is this in reference to the above mentioned macros (ie. low luminescence is the reason they were missed the first time?) or is this in reference to a certain percentage of all the diamonds found at FAC. And, what are the implications of the term "low luminescent" diamond? Are we talking "coal" here? take it easy, Ger

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next