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: CIMA who wrote (12362)	8/19/1998 2:08:00 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

Well those are definitions alright, but how do those relate to this deposit specifically. In other words what work was done to establish the material in each category. Detail is needed here to define the structure of the deposit and the confidence level an investor should have. echarter@vianet.on.ca

To: CIMA who wrote (12362)	8/19/1998 10:34:00 AM
From: Randyman	Respond to of 34075

Wonderful job there CIMA , <eom> Randyman

To: CIMA who wrote (12362)	8/19/1998 1:06:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 34075

This was originally meant to be a reply to S. Weathers who for some reason does not have a working return email address. ---------------------------> Reserves must be built upon already mined ore or extended therefrom. The difficulty lies in how you call the material ore. If you have not done a feasibility on it then it isn't ore. You may do a feasibility on drilled ground but the infill drilling must approach mine standard.. that is mighty close drilling and from 1500 or 2500 feet up and is prohibitively expensive. If there is not ore of the kind in the area or adjacent mine workings of the same type, then feasibility scale work is called for. A metallurgical test of the material is necessary. And it should be done on a few tons.. not just the odd leach test of samples. Drilling allows you to call the ground "drill indicated". I does not allow you to call the ground probable as actual ORE that would turn a profit must exist before probable material can exist. And it must be contiguous, as it must be mineable at a profit probably too! The key is the ore must exist in sufficient proven quantities to be mineable at a scale that will allow profitability and provably so by engineering standards. No 100 centre foot drill off of gold for instance normally passes these standards in general. There are some exceptions. In general at less than 10 to 20 million dollars expenditure on cross sectioning a property and doing feasibility calculations it would be foolhardy to say anything is in the proven category. BTW I have some properties in that category! Yet few VSE juniors want to touch them. Seems proven ore or even drill indicated is not their game! futher clarification.. Reserves (the only ore that can be called proven) must "usually" be built upon already mined ore or extended therefrom. Otherwise... very stringent proving standards of feasibility work apply that USUALLY accompany bulk sampling of the type that can only come from underground or open pit workings. There is no such thing as a proven resource. The word proven with regard to deposits is reserved for profitable ore. Resources can only be indicated. They cannot even be probable. These rules are not only established by the VSE but also and more importantly under statute law by AND by the society of professional engineers. In Ontario that is the APEO and OACETT. Proven means an engineer puts his stamp on it that mining may begin at such and such a scale according to given methods. EC<:-}