SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Artie who wrote (452)4/22/2002 12:04:18 PM
From: VAUGHN  Respond to of 613
 
Sorry Artie

When I read your "didn't pass the sniff test," and when you wrote "FT was dead" I got the impression that you were suggesting the pipe was uneconomic or worse, that you were implying there had been some game playing.

I am truly sorry to hear of your depreciation. However, I wouldn't fault TWG for trying to find an economic deposit at Torngate and failing to do so. That is the nature of exploration.

I should qualify my statement to "would confidently compare what TWG has and reported" and add, "at Jackson Inlet."

I followed TWG when it trumpeted Torngate, but did not invest. I do not believe gambling on a dike proving economic offers a big enough potential pay off to offset the risk of speculating in diamond plays.

My interest in TWG only turned into an investment (gamble) when I concluded they had multiple, very large, potentially economic pipes.

There is of course no guarantee, but I am personally quite optimistic that JI will not only prove economic, but has the potential to be much, much more.

In short, and this is just an opinion, I believe you have a reasonably good chance of seeing your gamble pay off. Perhaps, not as a result of the play motivating your original investment, but a fortuitous conclusion none the less.

Good luck.

Vaughn

P.S. No need to appologise, I understand and took no offense.

Keep well (and your chin up)

Regards

Vaughn