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 : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10976)	3/25/1998 4:49:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Respond to of 20681

Tom, Your point is correct. thall's question does deserve a serious answer. I go through withdrawls in the mid-afternoons which causes a quick trigger some times. I have in fact been asking a few questions as well and much of what I have heard agrees with your much more civil response. The simple truth of the matter is that for each and every deposit there is a lot of work needed to determine which is the appropriate method of extraction. This work is proceeding now and will take some time. But as I have posted before each deposit is a unique metalurgical puzzle that will have a unique solution. As regards to what we know about Franklin Lakes we have confirmed #s from one hole showing values around .2 opt. A lot more holes need to be drilled before we can make serious inferences about the nature of the deposit. But as you correctly point out it is conventional wisdom that if gold values can be obtained by standard fire assay then it will be able to be extracted. Early on thall asked a question of whether clay is heap-leachable. I don't yet have a complete answer but can make two observations. 1) there are treatments for clay that will help break up the structure that are not that expensive and may be cheaper than an attritter if all that is is needed is the 200 mesh stated in the most recent release. 2) heap leaching is generally used on deposits below .1 opt. On a higher grade such as .2 opt there are other methods that tend to be better. But as you say a lot of work needs to be done. Henry 'I am not :Dick: I just act like him sometimes' Volquardsen

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10976)	3/25/1998 5:10:00 PM
From: Dick Hoaxland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

To give you an idea of why the question you point out has no one quick and easy answer, the possible combinations of well established assay procedures all acceptable and credible to the industry, include 5 conventional and 5 non conventional flux materials, 5 conventional and 5 non conventional extraction metals. That means, within accepted industry practices, you can try out 100 unique combinations. How long do you suppose it would take to try out all of them ADDING, the combinations of drilling recovery formats, treatment of the ore, etc.. Naxos is now able to produce good solid repeatable assays BECAUSE THEY NOW HAVE MATERIAL FOR THE FIRST TIME, PROPERTY DRILLED FROM BD WITH THE RIGHT EQUIPMENT (REVERSE AIR CIRCULATION) THAT DOESNT WASH AWAY THE CLAY MATERIAL which is where the PM's are. (I just saved you about a dozen phone calls with all the above) What a load of manure. It took ten years to discover the proper drill equipment? It does not take very long at all for a reputable lab to perform a standard fire assay. Who are you trying to kid with such obvious nonsense? Did it take Behre Dolbear ten years to audit the Delgratia property? Did it take Strathcona ten years to audit the Bre-X property?