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 : Trump's 12 Diamond Picks, Discussions Limited -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tomato who wrote (684)	3/10/1998 1:59:00 AM
From: marcos	Respond to of 2251

Tomato, I bet that's the 23rd Congress pipe they're talking about. According to this Midland Walwyn propaganda piece in front of me, its ore is worth $720 US per tonne, its average value per carat is $120 US, carats per tonne are 6.0, and its area is one hectare [that's about two and a half acres]. We could make money with a shovel, a wheelbarrow, and an old washing machine.

To: Tomato who wrote (684)	3/10/1998 7:43:00 AM
From: Mark Bartlett	Respond to of 2251

Tomato, First, I would like to make it clear that Turner did not say that WSP would necessarily fit the exact same model. He did say that the Russian experts working with them are comparing it geologically to the Russian mine because it is very similar. He mentioned that particular mine, to illustrate if one has the grade/quality, you do not necessarily need the tonnage to have a high quality deposit. As far as the 50 million is concerned .... in his example, the area of the anomaly was "about the size of a football field". Now, a Canadian football field is about 90 meters by 30 meters (rough estimate) .... that equals 2700 sq meters ... down one meter equals 2700 cubic meters. Now, if I understood him correctly (and I double checked) he said this particular Russian mine was getting 50 million dollars of pay per (roughly) 2700 cubic meters of material. Maybe he meant to say 5 million, I do not know .... but that is what I heard and questioned. Again - I want too stress that he in NO WAY IMPLIED this was the situation at WSP .... it was simply to counter the suggestion that WSP may not have the tonnage. What they have is something that looks very similar to the Russian situation - whether it will turn out that way is anybody's guess at this point. The proof will be in the drilling/sampling. As far as tonnage is concerned, the figure I heard is about 5.2 million tons, as a rough guess for the WSP dyke. BTW ... next time I make a comment that does not make sense to you, I'd appreciate if you first deal directly with me, rather than drawing in others .. it is not fair to them, or the company. I agree, my original post could have been more clear ... so I will take the lion's share of the blame ... but courtesy would suggest that dealing with me first, to clarify the issue, would have been appropriate. MB