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

To: LoneClone who wrote (36471)3/21/2007 5:56:03 PM
From: dmick  Respond to of 78410
 
Agreed......can anybody give us the 'skinny' on those results?
Thanks,dm



To: LoneClone who wrote (36471)3/21/2007 6:01:57 PM
From: John McCarthy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78410
 
>>>>>>>>>
Why SGM insists on using this impenetrable format for their drill result tables I have no idea!
>>>>>>>>>

LOL

you should see it thru eyes <g>
(then again - nah - wouldn't wish that on you)

just want to tack on that based on the prior news release
they were waiting for results from 11 more holes.

I think this news release is reporting on
5 - and therefore I think there are 6 more holes left to report on.

regards,
John



To: LoneClone who wrote (36471)3/21/2007 9:58:32 PM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78410
 
That in fact is proper 43-101 format or proper format from CIM regs from 1955. Bearing, dip, collar location, acid or tropari tests, width in two systems, true width, grams per tonne, ounces per ton, etc., are all part of the format. Detailed description is required if the geological characteristics of the vein and occurence of the metals significantly affects economics.

EC<:-}


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News