SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Winspear Resources
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mineman who wrote (12882)1/20/1999 9:40:00 PM
From: mineman  Read Replies (2) of 26850
 
Sorry, I have to re-post as the previous post contained mistakes??

Until management says different I will assume none of the 22 stones from 1 to 5 carats are GEM quality and so all value below $50/carat.

Cts. --- U.S.$ per ct.

10.8 --- $1,500
8.4 ---- $3,000
6 ------ $1,500
4.6 -- less than $50
4.2 -- less than $50
3.5 -- less than $50
3.2 -- less than $50
3.0 -- less than $50
2.6 -- less than $50
2.4 -- less than $50
2.2 -- less than $50
1.9 -- less than $50
1.9 -- less than $50
1.8 -- less than $50
1.7 -- less than $50
1.6 -- less than $50
1.5 -- less than $50
1.4 -- less than $50
1.4 -- less than $50
1.3 -- less than $50
1.3 -- less than $50
1.2 -- less than $50
1.1 -- less than $50
1.0 -- less than $50
1.0 -- less than $50

Carat weights from 4.6 to 1.0 are estimated as management only said they recovered 22 stones from 1 to 5 carats averaging 1.9 carats.

Possible reasons the top 3 stones are valued at so much more than the bottom 22 are:

1. The dyke is different from any other dyke or pipe in the world in that the few large stones are top Gem quality and the remainder of stones under 5 carats are industrial grade, or

2. The sample just happens to include 3 top-quality gem-grade stones and is not representative of the remainder of the dyke, or

3. The 3 large stones did not originate from the Snap Lake dyke.

Please include any other explanations!!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News