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 : Royal Oak-RYO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Bidder who wrote (747)	3/18/1998 2:20:00 AM
From: Michael Bidder	Respond to of 1706

What reasons can you give to support your assertion that Kemess be cash positive. Please don't quote Royal Oaks numbers. Stick to the basics : Rock mechanics Striping ratios Crushing Throughput Metallurgy Milling Concentration Seperation Flotation I am unfamiliar with these processes but I understand that to make the argument that Kemess is economic would require them. If you provide an answer I will endeavor to debate it. My reasons against are: A) Low Grade B) Low Commodity prices C) Rock Hardness D) Used equipment Thankyou in advance for your consideration of the issue. -Respectfully littleguy, Michael Bidder

To: Michael Bidder who wrote (747)	3/18/1998 8:18:00 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1706

Michael. Of your comments the only valid one is low commodity prices. However Kemiss is economic at gold $300 +/- and copper at 80 cents +/-, and copper is on it's way back up. The low grade was well known and designed for. The rock hardness is good, harder rock shatters and has lower grinding index that many soft roaks, and your used equipment argument is laughable. 3 strikes and you are out. You do not know anything at all about this stuff, do you? Bill