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 : Golden Eagle Int. (MYNG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Gold who wrote (7142)	7/1/1998 4:29:00 PM
From: the Chief	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

Hi Mike. Safety standards are always upgraded when "Gringoes" take over property. Looking at the area that Guido describes, the deposit encompasses not only the alluvial areas (river, banks, low lying plateaus) but also the mountain ranges. The dimensional data says 25Km x 2.5km x 500-2500m. The alluvial plateau "appears to be in the 100's of meters. This would insinuate that the "leaf gold" as described, found in the mineshafts at various depths would not likely remain intact and microns of gold "dust" would be present in the surrounding ore. This again sounds like it would support drilling. I believe his explanation of why NOT to drill is supported in the plateau, but not in the mountain ranges that he so quickly uses to add to his totals ! You said:If this is the case, the geology data learned from the "hard rock" might not be as useful as it would be completely distinct from the placer deposits; however, I would still guess that they would have enough to go on from just ground surveys due to the steeply sloping land and exposed outcroppings, road cuttings, trench samples etc. I donot share that "guess, Mike. What you have described is a geophysical analysis with no supporting data to confirm any contiguous mineralization. This in fact "may" be one of things in question at the moment. In all my research thus far, I have seen no IP data, no geophysical flyover data, no technical data supporting a this "assumption". Also, we have only briefly touched on these "steep sloping mountains. I realize pictures can be deceiving but every picture seen on the website shows rather slow esculating foilage covered "hills", that are not radically different from many other projects. They certainly are not as steep as the sites presently in drill programs in the Chilean Andes You said: I have no doubts about the size and extent of the gold deposit and that it would be profitable to mine.. I do have lots of doubts about the company itself, however. Can I presume you have no doubt in the 6.4mm ozs estimate? I too, believe it will be profitable to mine, probably in the $140-$160 per oz. I also share some doubts about the "logic" of producing this kind of data post Bre-X, without a massive amount of supporting documentation. You said:Hope management gets its act together so we can all make money on this one. Here-here thanks for responding so quickly the Chief