To: .Trev who wrote (56 ) 9/30/1998 2:06:00 PM From: VAUGHN Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 92
Hello Trev Thank you for the e-mail. I will do what little I can to answer your questions but some seem better directed at LTL IR. My claim map is probably woefully out of date by now. It was published by Enersource January 1996 and many properties could have been dropped, optioned or sold since then. The news announcement states that Contwoyto - 1, is located in the Greater Jericho area approximately 30 km east of the original Jericho pipes. Going by my map and scale, 30km appears to be outside or right on the border of the LTL and Inukshuk claims (to the east). What struck me about this announcement was not what they said so much as what they did not say. They did not refer to the shared ownership of the claims in question, they did not refer to the number of geochemical trains they had followed to this area, they announced a kimberlite, but not a pipe despite the fact that they state that it outcrops on surface. They announced the intersection before they even completed the drill hole. The float is described as diamondiferous, but its micro/macro ratio is never referenced. They state that the float was found near the head of the indicator mineral train but not that it was immediately down-ice from Contwoyto – 1. They refer to other targets in the area but not, how many or whether they are geochemical, geophysical or coincident. I would say that if there is a cluster and there is no evidence published of that, there is a reasonable likelihood that some or all of it may be east of the LTL claims on Inukshuk land, but again there is no evidence of any such deposit. This all smells too much to me and I would be sitting on the sidelines waiting for another buying opportunity if you insist on playing this stock. Regards