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 : Twin Mining (formerly Twin-Gold) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chas. who wrote (303)	2/20/2002 8:15:41 AM
From: geoffb_si	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 613

Chuck: I don't think VAUGHN's credibility will go to zero. Damaged? Maybe. But, one of his main points all along has been that there are many pipes in the area and some very good geochemistry associated with more than one of these pipes. Freightrain may not produce the desired results, but that won't be the end of the story. I may not agree with VAUGHN's points or his way of "debating" on the thread, but he has identified an interesting play. Geoff

To: Chas. who wrote (303)	2/20/2002 12:43:38 PM
From: teevee	Respond to of 613

chuck, regards your wondering about who is behind the "geoshares" thing.....my guess is that it's teevee or at least he may be a contributing type of editor or something.....anyway I think it is teevee FWIW.... Thanks for the flattery, but its not me. I think russett has the spec players cycle right but he is off on the potential of the 2002 diamond plays in general. Now that the drilling has started absolutely anything is possible in any of the 3 area plays, obviously the bigger, more involved, money backed companies will be the ones to watch, especially ACA...... Well...a diference of opinion is what makes markets eh:-)) regards TWG possibilities......who knows.......I do know this, if TWG hits big diamonds Vaughn will become the new Diamond Guru God expert of Canada, if they bomb, his credibility is going to zero. I strongly disagree. Vaughn is a very keen and knowledgable student of diamond exploration and no matter how the TWG results turn out, his credibility will remain intact as far as I am concerned. Unfortunately, no matter how good the indicator mineral chemistry is, or how good diamond counts are, that is no guarantee that there will be sufficient grade, size distribution and value/carat to turn a prospect into a money making mine. Although the "science" increases the odds of success, exploration and evaluation of a kimberlite pipe remains a high risk, empirical process(show me the big stones) that ends in failure far more often than not. cheers, and have fun at the PDAC (I won't be attending)