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 : TRIVALENCE MINING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mick who wrote (516)	7/27/2000 3:10:19 PM
From: Phil Cressman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 527

Mick, I think you're shooting a bit too high since .25 per tonne is more than economical and they're hoping for between .20 and .40 . Even though the yellow ground bulk sample proved a whole lot lower grade than expected it's still economic to run, so I'm told. It's just that the rich alleuvials currently being run is giving real nice results. Unless they find higher grade pockets in yellow ground or nice rich underlaying Kimberlite I'd not expect them to process ground until they've run thru a lot of alleuvials. There is a pile of it though, figure 5 hectares X say 20 metres = 1,000,000 tonnes (very rough estimate probably on light side) and at 7 carats per 100 tonnes it means about 70,000 carats @ say US$150 = over 10 million dollars in reserve in the yellow ground. Of course there is the mining tax and the cost of moving and processing a million tonnes of material. Unless grade pockets considerably higher are encountered I'd expect it a marginal proposition. If the undisturbed Kimberlite shows promise the economics change somewhat since the cap has to be stripped off then and it would be nice to at least recover this preparation cost by processing the material.