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 : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John McCarthy who wrote (31244)	1/29/2007 10:11:46 PM
From: loantech	Respond to of 78416

You are good John.Thanks for the information.

To: John McCarthy who wrote (31244)	1/29/2007 10:35:40 PM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78416

John, I do nto think the issue is tonnage. I think it is transportation. Plenty of ore and blue sky.

To: John McCarthy who wrote (31244)	1/29/2007 11:02:39 PM
From: Mr. Aloha	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78416

No, the A-Extension and Big Bull resources won't increase the reserves since those areas weren't in the scope of the feasibility study. If they do a new feasibility study on those areas or redo this feasibility study to include them, they would increase the reserves, assuming they're shown through analysis to be economic. Just estimating the resource from drilling won't increase the reserves, especially since they're out of scope -- the resources need to be analyzed to determine what portion is economically mineable. As is often the case on SH, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about or he's being intentionally deceptive.