Thanks, Alan;
Re: " By the time Bateman began conducting verification tests in September, the FM facility was no longer available to IPM or its consultants. This resulted in Bateman having to use the mobile trailer where testing was limited to 20 lb samples. Experimental conditions may also have been limited versus what was done at Friendship. I assume it was this set of experimental conditions that was referred to as the "nominated recovery process", which Bateman deemed not suitable for commercial purposes."
Please consider the following:
April 2, 1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASDAQ: IPMCF
CDN: IPMC
Recovery Demonstration Plant Acquired
Toronto, Ontario April 2, 1997 - International Precious Metals Corporation (IPM) announced today that it had purchased a mobile version of the processing plant used during the development of its leach recovery process. IPM completed the plant acquisition from Friendship Metals, owner and operator of the research and development facility where precious metals recovery testing had been conducted. The plant will be placed into operation at the company's Goodyear, Arizona facility this week in order to accelerate and further optimize the recovery breakthrough for its Black Rock mineralization.
The plant has a capacity of 20-kg/hour and can process up to 300-kg of ore per day in continuous mode. IPM's operation of the plant will allow the company to optimize the recovery process and produce concentrate samples for product testing by domestic and offshore refiners. Additionally, the recovery of precious metals from larger sample sizes inherently produces more reliable results than assays of standard 30-gram ( 0.03-kg ) samples.
Seems that the mobile facility is being touted as adequate to do bulk testing.
Re: " Was the process as tested in the mobile trailer different than the process that was conducted at Friendship in bulk quantities and reported at the AGM as capable of recovering 0.25+oz/ton gold? Did Bateman condemn the process as tested at Friendship or just the 20 lb process tested in the mobile trailer?"
Alan, I honestly don't think anyone can answer your question on the basis of the press releases. Given what has transpired over the course of the past year or so, I strongly suspect that the press releases are purposely ambiguous and I am certain that the releases are incomplete with regard to releasing the guts of either the Bateman Report or the BD Report. The answer undoubtedly lies in the full Bateman report and the full Behre Dolbear report.
Re: " It may be somewhat of a stretch, but it's possible to conclude from what has been released...."
I agree that it may be a stretch <g>, and I wouldn't want to argue against any of your conclusions. The wording of the press release, something like "30 available processes", doesn't make me inclined to infer anything beyond a grab-bag of processes known to Bateman. Perhaps this is unnecessarily pessimistic.
O. H.
P.S., Joe, if you have something to contribute beyond name-calling, let's hear it. |
