The FF Fa(X) Files
I have wrapped up some thoughts on FF's presents here on SI. I hope it is helpful for less experienced investors' education, and as a quick reference
guide for the more experienced.
I concur with LC that it would be helpful to others if you established your own board and refrain from posting here.
And now, you go on ignore.
FF's quotes in bold <g>
Now lets apply these facts to compare ARU to Hollister.
First the grade and size of the deposit are not even close.
Facts-
- Hollister FDN
Grade 42 g/t 4-6 g/t?*
Size (Au ozs) 12 m** 995,000
* My estimate, cross-sectional. FF refuses to describe his method or the method of his source.
** My estimate, FF has not given us his to date. I have raised mine after looking again at the data, previously 3-5 g/t.
Reference Great Basin links below.
Sageyrain once again you misrepresent the facts. Hollisters core intercepts or the ones of any significant are measured in 3 ft or less.
Facts
50% of all intercepts at Hollister are > 4 ft. true width.
Here's just a few examples of true width intercepts -@opt au (g/t Au)-, 6.7' @ 0.14 (4.3), 9' @ 0.42 (13), 12' @ .043 (1.3 ), 7.8' @ 0.171 (5.3), 10.5 @ 1.2 (37), 3.7 @ 0.12 (3.7), 3.4 @ .927 (29).............
(note, this is a quicky grab of a few examples)
FF may jump on the fact that some of these are low-grade. I tried to give a range of examples, low to high. Contrary to his statement, many (most?) are "significant".
The bottom line is an average grade of 21 g/t for the currently projected, DILUTED resource. (Diluted means they have projected mixing of a certain amount of waste rock.
greatbasingold.com
greatbasingold.com
Take QueenStake in Nevada for example which has far better fundamentals than Hollister
Fact-
- Hollister Jarret Canyon (Queenstake)
Grade 21 g/t Au 8 g/t Au
Size 995,000 oz Au 878,000 oz Au
Geometry* Relatively uniform, tabular, Complex, subhorizontal to
consistent, near 70 deg dip. to subvertical, often poddy.
Host Rock Ordivician sediments Ordivician sediments
Host rock Unstable ??, but according to FF's rules, Unstable because they are sediments.
conditions
-----------------------------------------------
*Take a look at the complex geometries of tunnels needed to axis the chaotically- shaped and distributed ore zones at Queenstake:
Mine models, pgs. 35-39, 06 technical report.
queenstake.com
Compare to the relatively simple geometry of ore zones and axis tunnels at Hollister:*
Level plan, pg. 44, 06 technical report.
greatbasingold.com
**This single level is a good example of the consistently straight tunnels that will be used on all the levels.
Host rock type is show very clearly on there Diamond Drill Hole layouts on there Web Site. This type of rock is very competent to mine in. I also can deduce from the
nice long relatively unfractured core lengths that the ground is highly competent.
This development is planed in the competent
waste rock and from the footwall side of the ore body. Once again the waste rock they describe is quite competent
Therefore one does not have to be privy to inside information if he has the
experience and knowledge to comprehend what is being shown in the PR
Fact-
1) As far as I know, no core photos have been shown to date on the web site outside of mineralised zones, and therefore the photos may not represent conditions in the
footwall of the orebody. They might be representative, at least locally for footwall conditions, but there is not data publicly available from which to make definitive
statements. Please refer us to your source photos.
2) Aurelian has not released any cogent information needed to asses ground conditions in the footwall of the mineralised zone (east side). This includes the near surface,
where there is likely to be deep tropical weathering in the bed rock and there is also sedimentary cover which you are concerned about. Tropical weathering can be on the order of
10's to 100's of meters depth, can make the rock condition very bad, and locally may extend to great depths,
particularly along faults.. Examples of such basic systematic data, needed before one can make an assesment of ground conditions, is RQD (measures fracture density), rock
strength, rock type, fracture orientation, etc.
An experienced eye can make a first pass estimation of potential mining difficulties if she has access to good
top- to bottom core photos, from multiple holes in the area of interest. To date, only one hole, 63, has been drilled from W to E from the footwall side, that would start to address these questions. No footwall slide photos are available on the web site as of this date.
In summary, there is essentially no data available at present to the public that would allow us to evaluate FF's comments about rock conditions.
If you want to make a comparision perhaps you should compare Goldcorps Red Lake Mine even though it falls far short of ARU in many area's
Fact
- FDN Red Lake
Grade 4-6 g/t?* 36 g/t (present global resource
weighted average)
Size (oz) 12 m (Present, will increase) 6.45m (present global resource)
11 m (historic)
Geometry Relatively simple/ Complex, tabular, sub-horizontal to
tabular, moderately dipping steeply dipping.
dipping.
Width 1-150m 0.2- up to "several meters" (quoted from GG website)
est. avg., 100m + est. avg., about 2m?
Host Rock Volcanics Metamorphosed volcanics
Ground
Conditions ??(FF claims ground conditions stable) FF says ground conditions can be very bad
----------------------------------
goldcorp.com
infomine.com
Remember, FF has soundly chastised me for comparing FDN to Hollister, an underground, narrow vein, high-grade,
relatively simple geometry, unstable rock-condition mine. He has offered this comparison as a better
analogy: Red Lake- an undergound, narrow vein,
high-grade, complex geometry, unstable
rock-condition mine.
I picked Hollister because it was the most recent example of a tangible buy out number for an underground resource,
and therefor more similar to FDN than the buyout of open-pit Cumberland example, and, I think, represents a better
jump off point for estimating an ARU buyout # at the present time. I realize it is not nearly a perfect fit.
I also know for a fact that......(continued at bottom of post)***
* my estimate, FF has so far declined to give his. Even if it turns out to be significantly higher (I could be wrong, often am) it will be nowhere close
to Red Lakes grade.
This supposed competent ground you talk about has been highly stressed and fractured
over time resulting in rock bursting,
deaths and the loss of a whole level a couple
of years ago
Fact
So, there is another fact that contradicts your proposed fact that a comparison of the Red Lake
Mine and FDN is most appropriate
You gush about the good rock conditions at FDN.
f you want to compare ARU intercepts by that standard then Hollister does not even come close to the hundreds and in
one case over a thousand grams per ton ARU hit
Fact
You are insinuating that the FDN resource is very high grade. Most of FDN will be mined by underground bulk-mining
methods, in my opinion. That means that the relatively small volumes of very high-grade material will
be mixed in with lower grade material in averaging the ore-grade over the life of the mine. A rough
idea of this can be gained by looking at all the intercepts over 10m length that contribute to almost all of
the tons and ounces inferred to date.
Length (m) Au, g/t Length (m) Au, g/t
17 5.4 237 4.1
127 1.7 205 8.4
76 3.0 73 1.5
22 2.7 190 2.1
51 3.6 60 3.4
10 2.7 172 3.4
19 2 190 2.1
36 3.7 60 3.4
173 4.7 52 1
161 6.5 172 3.8
40 5.3 27 2.4
98 12.0 86 3.2
108 5.0 52 1
58 1.3 27 2.4
192 4.0 86 3.2
102 5.0 137 1.7
81 6.0 16.6 4
14 15.0 54 1.3
192 7.4 18 1.1
135 9.8 118 1.6
189 24 249 3.1
255 12.6 85 7.6
196 6.0 203 1.3
260 6.6
125 1.7
41.2 1.6
aurelian.ca
***
........there are laymen and experts here at SI, much brighter than me who can make (up) their own mines.
Imagine that.
and if they see somethink (actually most do), they take it or leave it, few fake it and (steel it..... or yourself to reality).
Oops forgot the evidence, they say aleph ants have very thick skin, amongst other things.
And if I am really lucky, someone here offers me back some good advice or knowledge,
a useful scolding or a joke, and then I am grateful. |
