Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter matson who wrote (20942)	6/18/1999 9:09:00 PM
From: Rocket Red	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26850

Peter The Results are Great for large stones coming from this Pit as it was lower grade. I'm told The next 3000 tons will prove too be lots better and results in 21 to 25 days. PS I will go on record saying the results Will be out on the 19 of July.

To: peter matson who wrote (20942)	6/18/1999 9:39:00 PM
From: Digger	Respond to of 26850

I shared your initial impression, but we now know that Winspear did not just get luckey. In fact the truth is closer to WillP's thought of" what if they got unlucky" on the first sample. We have double the results of pit 1. THey thought the lower pit 1 counts were due to poor collection technique and this may account for some of it. But what if pit 3 outdoes pit 2 at this one outdid pit 1? Dr. Bob's main thesis is that there will be statistical reliability, or consistancy, in general terms, across the sample. This result suggests that they may have got unlucky because these results and the pit 2 results far outdo the pit 1 results. Anyone who sells on these results cannot be thinking long term. There will be a very profitable mine. There is "consistency" and Winspear did not just get lucky. So we didn't get the 100 caret diamond, on this sampling.