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 : Kensington Resources Ltd. (V.KRT) * Diamond in the rough! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (5080)	8/28/2001 12:43:08 PM
From: Grant Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5206

Hey Joe Average, your commentary really is becoming rather pedestrian and very "average". I am not known to be particularly happy with KRT management, or even Debeers for that matter, but your attempts to spin this one leave me LOL. "DeBeers is putting some of their richer projects on the back burner. They have even suspended development of their NWT projects for the time." Come on Joe, get your facts straight, and don't peddle BS! Don't try to summarize complex situations with overly simplistic analysis or misleading statements of fact. Debeers has not "suspended development" of the Snap Lake project. What they did do recently was admit that their development timetable was perhaps overly optimistic. Instead of planning for a spring 2004 mine opening they have pushed that back one year to spring 2005. The reasons for this change in the development timetable are related to a more complex environmental screening process in the NWT. Debeers (and previous project owner Winspear) assumed that because they intended to mine the Snap Lake dyke using conventional underground methods (not open pit), and knowing that their project follows closely after those of BHP (Ekati) and RTZ/Aber (Diavik), they believed that their project would not require a full-blown environmental review. That may not turn out to be the case. The environmental screening process in the north recently changed, with the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board now controlling the regulatory process instead of government (i.e. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, sometimes known by its former acronym DIAND). As a new regulatory agency, the MVEIRB needs to flex its muscles and demonstrate to the "green" crowd that they are responsible stewards of the land and water in the north. Hence Debeers' recent "awakening" to the new political reality of the extent of the environmental screening process that their project is likely to undergo, and the subsequent change to the proposed development timetable. The Snap Lake project has not changed. The economics have not changed. The only thing that has possibly changed is the length of the environmental review process. (I say "possibly changed" because the MVEIRB has not yet announced what type of environmental review - comprehensive or limited scope - the Snap Lake project must undergo.) Debeers is simply signaling to the marketplace that the review process is likely to be longer than initially anticipated. This is Debeers rolling with the punches, not taking themselves out of the fight! If you don't know the facts, please don't make them up - it leaves you with a credibility gap that colours the rest of your commentary. GB