International Precious Metals (IPMCF) 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 : International Precious Metals (IPMCF)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bruce McGaughey who wrote (26431)	11/15/1997 3:40:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) of 35569

Is there always a direct correlation between assay and recovery ?? -------------------------------- answer: No. there are many refractory ores that will melt or fire assay as "ore" but there is not practical means of recovering the gold. An example would be a massive arsenical pyrite with 1/10 th of an ounce gold. I don't think anyone would tackle that one. What is plain here in this release is that there are no economics established for the recovery and no corroboration of any particular quantity of platinum. Presence of platinum could mean 5 parts per billion. We would require 1000 times that much to be partially economic if there were a method of recovery established which plainly there is not. This whole thing hinges on do you believe the companies special assay method in the face of no credible witness coming forth and INDEPENDENTLY saying direct to you that there is a probability of: A. confirming the assays presented by the company and B. Coming up with a recovery process that is economic. If you want to melt the ore in two separate passes and and put it in a microwave as they do in this case to assay it then you would have to have 20.0 ounces per ton to achieve economics. Probably that is not the process they would try. IF they are on the level about the grade AND it is micro fine as they say it still requires formidable technology to try to get it out. Technology not yet developed we are told. Assurances of an independent kind that the orebody is feasible are required by all Canadian exchanges before anyone can sell their seed stock issued on an IPO. It just depends on how long you want to guess that the company has a solution and that the presence of a mute consultant is proof that they will succeed, or are on the level. If you want to accept the company's word in the face of a steadily eroding stock price its up to you. Funnies usually require some kind of "pudding" test to get people on board. Controversy usually surrounds. Defensive management who want to play cards close to vest is not heartening. The possibility of another mining scam always hovers and should hover in the minds of the wary. echarter@vianet.on.ca

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next