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 : Montello Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Terry J. Crebs who wrote (1575)	2/17/1998 6:34:00 PM
From: Chris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4256

I tend to agree. The last line of the press release made me smile. <<We recommend Montello as a speculative investment based on its land position, management's previous Alberta diamond experience and its geological abilities in generating kimberlite drill targets.>> Let's remember Hinton. I remain hopeful, but somewhat cynical also. Don't show me targets. Show me kimberlite core with mineralogy in the diamond stability field.

To: Terry J. Crebs who wrote (1575)	2/17/1998 9:26:00 PM
From: FRANK KENDRICK	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4256

Hi Terry and gang, Terry...the domal feature is important from what I understand. About 1/3 of that feature is on the SE property. Aren't the men in charge of the drilling program considered experts in their field??? Is it possible that the kimberlite field is wide and trends NW to SE??? As for caution, that is always the best approach. Hopefully it wasn't just the Yorkton recommendation that caused this movement!!!????!!!!!! Keep the faith...lots of drilling going on...it takes time. See ya'll in the Bahamas!!! Frank

To: Terry J. Crebs who wrote (1575)	2/17/1998 11:32:00 PM
From: Jesse	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4256

Terry, again thanks for your thoughts. I agree that we the public are not qualified to make some of the proposals made in the Yorkton recommendation, but I think you're assuming you know too much about the goings-on in the region, geologically and exploration-wise. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying some of your statements may be unqualified, based on what we actually know from Ashton, et al. Most of the facts are not there for us to conclude from. And yes, Yorkton does sound a lil biased in their support of the play. Re. the line about the innovative geologic model, I'd like to know more about it! I assume it's now including seismics & EM's? - Do you know? Regards, -jess :>