To: Famularo who wrote (7005 ) 11/27/1998 9:23:00 PM From: Jesse Respond to of 7966
Frank, I like it! Reverse psychology-- why not?! Stock price halved anyway. . . A couple comments made show Ashton's tactic of snuffing out some of the juniors in the region may be starting to make its mark! Obviously, as you point out, given the fact that Ashton and prtnrs continue to work in the area, & esp. with the Ashton parent company's support (Ashton Australia ) as reported in The Edmonton Journal, it exemplifies their true perceptions of the potential of Alberta. -- Ashton Australia's "Arglye" mine has been prolonged for a few more years (see previous discussions on this thread), so the AB time table may have been laxed a lil! <g> One comment- Ashton has made remarkable progress, Frank, regardless of whether it seems like it. This ain't no industry for Speedy Gonzales!! It's a gradual, considered progress schedule. Ashton has done extraordinarily well, if you ask me... That is except for perhaps their reporting thereof. That last ACA release leaves a lot of questions. For one, what was found below the 1.2mm cutoff (for indicative and comparison means)? For two, the hole locales and actual dimensions (actual hole diameter vs. that used to estimate the weight), depths, etc? - From the Feb.26/98 Ashton NR: "Two reverse circulation rigs are drilling large diameter holes in the central portions of kimberlite K-14 to collect a sample of at least 500 tonnes for analysis by dense media separation." - - - - - Re. reporting standards, e.g, the total weight or estimated weight vs. actual weight (as we discussed, including 'wet' vs. 'dry' weights), here's an excerpt from Kennecott and WEM's NR yesterday (Nov.27/98): "The mini-bulk sample was obtained by drilling two 27 cm reverse circulation drill holes into kimberlite body C29/30. Approximately 7.6 tonnes of kimberlite (dry weight) was recovered from a nominal weight of 17.6 tonnes indicating a 43 per cent recovery factor overall. Initial processing was designed to recover diamonds larger than 1.0 mm in size using dense media separation..." This serves as a striking example of the differences that can be "engineered" in reporting depending on desired results (if details such as those supplied in this last NR example are left out), and the importance of full disclosure. Kaiser commented on the poor reporting standards in Canada. This seems esp. true on the TSE. -- Plenty more questions. I realize competition in diam. explo. is fierce and companies need to keep back as much vital data as they can to "win." --- Anyway, a great evenin' to ya, -j :>