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 : Golden Eagle Int. (MYNG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (30662)	2/27/2003 12:22:28 AM
From: ge-believer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34075

"Still, I don't know of any large placer operations like MYNG is suggesting." How about something in the 10,000 ton size range? Weren't there such large placer mining operations during the various gold rushes?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (30662)	2/27/2003 9:51:02 AM
From: steadyasyougo	Respond to of 34075

<Definitely unheard of>, indeed. Talk tons. Take just 30K of the 74K acres, 1K feet height for the "updirt" for block caving, and you have 74B tons. 50 plants (that will take time!) running 330 dpy at 11K tons per day would chew up 181.5M tpy. So, this will take 400+ years! Sure, all of the 74M acres is not in conglomerate. 30K sounds like a conservative number to use, to allow for non-conglomerate area, towns, roads, run-offs, tailings disposal, etc for the remaining 44K acres. 1K feet is conservative for the updirt? If not, try 500 feet and get 200 years. Remember, in some places they claim as much as 8K feet of conglomerate, but I think this is rare. Terry says about 2K feet average. So, after we block cave, we have another 1K feet or so of "downdirt" to dig out and mine later. And the downdirt is known to have richer veneros, on average, and maybe closer together, if I remember right. Sure, these numbers get incredibly high. We have to put tailings back in areas we mined out, as well as into non- conglomerate areas. But, Terry was wise to claim the average of 30 km length by 10 km wide (300 sq km = about 74K acres), for tailings and to block others out when other companies hear about our success. Want to really scratch your head? Look at the maps of the total conglomerate. The Tipuani River Valley conglomerate is only about 5-10% of the total conglomerate in the several river valleys north and south and east of Tipuani! Of course, we know that the Tipuani river conglomerate probably has the highest average grade. Folks, we are talking about an incredible amount of mountain(s) tops that were transported into these valleys. DEFINITELY UNHEARD OF, INDEED! It is so vast that I think some peoples' impression is that it can't be true. But, it is well documented, and by others besides GE. Neat, huh? So, Attwood says it is definitely not a normal placer, he calls it an "alluvial fill". But, the fill occurred just like a placer occurs. The difference is that fills occurred as separate events, sometimes water was the predominant carrier, sometimes it was just mud flow. When it was water dominant, we got gold dropping to the bottom of that layer, just like a placer deposit would do. These layers are the veneros. When it was a time of mud flow, the gold remained more or less dispersed in the mud. This is the layers of material in between the veneros. The way I look at it is that we have a multitude of placer deposits stacked one on top of the other, with some gold more concentrated, with other layers, gold more spread out. THE PLACER DEPOSIT OF ALL PLACER DEPOSITS, stacked hundreds of feet high to make Ron's ALLUVIAL FILL! gerald

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (30662)	2/27/2003 11:50:03 AM
From: steadyasyougo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34075

Claude, this brings up a question based on my DD. I had always heard that companies, big or small, do not like to mess with placer deposits. Proving up resources and reserves is just too difficult. Well, Ron Atwood testified at trial that he worked for Newmont, that he had worked on 22 projects, and that 20 of them were placers. He didn't really say how many were with Newmont, but I would assume most were. Realizing how companies don't like placers, Ron has to be just about the most experienced and best expert in the world on placers? 20 placer deposits, that seems like a lot. Of course, Ron says ours is not a true placer, it is an alluvial fill. As I said before, I look at the conglomerate as a stack of placers. With 35 veneros, or pay streaks, identified, that implies at least 70 placer layers. There may be more in some areas. Nice that we have such an expert on our team. gerald