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 : Pacific North West Capital Corporation-PFN on Alberta -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ptaskmaster who wrote (1510)	5/5/2000 2:37:00 PM
From: Claude Cormier	Respond to of 2255

Ptask, Don't know why gold is in there. Although it is valuable and not a barbelic, it doesn not belong under the label PGM. BTW, I am sure you are aware that gold is usually much easier to process than PGM's and therefore more profitable. Even at these low gold prices, there are deposits being exploited, developped or discovered, that are much more profitable than any of the PGM's deposit you can think about.

To: Ptaskmaster who wrote (1510)	5/5/2000 2:43:00 PM
From: Bruce Robbins	Respond to of 2255

Ptask, They are reported like this because that is how they arrive from the assayer. See G43/44 (Pt, Pd, Rh, Au) at: chemex.com and click the link to lead collection here: chemex.com It has to do with they way they are assayed. When the lab does the lead collection method, they get a precious metal bead (Au, Ag, PGE). I guess the news release writers love getting the assays reported this way. They can keep them vague <g>. Bruce

To: Ptaskmaster who wrote (1510)	5/5/2000 3:12:00 PM
From: russet	Respond to of 2255

<<I'm apparently missing some important mineralogical point here, but can someone enlighten me as to why PFN news releases persist in labeling gold (Au) as a Platinum Group Metal (PGM)? The statement is clear, "PGM (Pt + Pd + Au + Rh)" and so used throughout their news releases.>> To add to the comments the others made, this question was asked at a convention I attended recently. The answer appears to be mainly because of tradition. South African mining companies were pioneers in PGM exploration and mining development. It was common to include gold in all assays of PGM's in South Africa, perhaps because of the presence of appreciable amounts of gold in the reef deposits there. Everyone has adopted the custom, even though gold content in other deposits is far less. It certainly serves to inflate values per tonne of ore, but recoveries become the more important consideration. Edit: I just remembered that the SAf assays were many times called Precious Metal Group assays,...PMG's. Perhaps the industry is confused as well (gggggggggg).