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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Dino's Bar & Grill -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Goose94 who wrote (36928)	11/10/2017 2:41:45 PM
From: Goose94	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 203382

New Nadina Explorations (NNA-V) intraday new 52 week high, $2.98

To: Goose94 who wrote (36928)	11/13/2017 9:30:58 AM
From: Goose94	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 203382

New Nadina Explorations (NNA-V) @HRA-Coffin Core pictures. Hmmm. I've got to say I'm of two minds about the whole concept. I like getting them, out of curiosity as much as anything but I don't pretend I can or even want to read too much into them. I've always been a "very nice pictures - can I see assays though?" kind of guy. There are rare - and they are VERY rare- occasions where things like the amount and abundance of visible gold at multiple sites along the core length indicate you're going to get a boomer (Aurelian comes to mind) in no matter how they split and sample but, in many cases core pics can mislead as much, if not more, than they inform. I was busy at #MIF Friday and didn't really look at the $NNA core pics until today. Nice stuff and some of the core lengths pictured should deliver good grade, but its impossible to say yet how large those zones are, much less their true thickness. Some of the structures with nice sulphides are pretty oblique to the core which will exaggerate the quoted, as opposed to "true" widths. I would be particularly careful about magnified views. Again, very nice shots and some of that will kick nicely - if it goes to the lab. Ellen refers to "specimen core". Does that mean they are keeping that for reference and not splitting and shipping those sections? I assume they ARE shipping everything in the larger intervals but there are good and valid reasons to hang onto some of the sexy stuff for later study so some of the prettiest core might not get assayed. You only ship half the core and you're not allowed to pick the best pieces. You draw the saw line before you cut it and decide in advance which half (left or right) goes to the lab and stick to it. That is basic QA/QC practice. To be clear, I don't think Ellen is trying to mislead anyone. That project has been her baby for literally decades and she's clearly excited has hell. I'm happy for her but I still prefer assays and will be interested to see a couple more holes drilled so they can start to figure out the true widths and geometry. Keep the field of view in mind, Magnified pictures are covering maybe a centimetre of core so don't take those pics and mentally expand them by 10,000 in your head and assume the whole large interval will be the same. One concern I have with this trend is that if we keep seeing huge jumps in market value base on core pics (a la $GGI and $NNA) its not out of the question IIROC will put the kibosh on the whole thing and not allow companies to release them unless they come with or after assays. That is basically what happened with core viewing on property tours. You used to get to see whatever was in the boxes but now you can only view holes that are released. That was a selective disclosure issue and core pictures are not the same but, if the powers that be decide they are "misleading", intentionally or otherwise, I could see IIROC stepping in. Not saying I agree with that either, just that there is real potential of that happening if a couple of these high flyers develop engine trouble once assays are out. ceo.ca