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 : Pacific North West Capital Corporation-PFN on Alberta -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Berry Picker who wrote (2204)	11/20/2003 1:07:01 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2255

Well it all depends on yer point of view. To me if you are sandstone in Nevada and you report 200 feet of .05 ounces per ton, it makes perfect sense. I will buy in (PEX). If however you say 2 grams, I like that too. 100 grams sounds great. We have a property in the NWT that averages 200 grams gold per ton. What do you think of that? If they say 1500 PP, it is 1.5 grams. That is what it is. If they said .043 ounces per ton, it would not sound near as good to most people. One of the problems too is that it is grams pre metric tonne. Ounces per ton is troy ounces per short ton. A completely different thing. To get ounces per short ton from grams, multiply by .0291666 We have a tailings pond of 4 million tons of .04 ounces per ton. What do you think? We also have one that runs 5.14 grams /tonne. (tailings). Economics regardless of grade are something else again. EC<:-}