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 : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Andrew who wrote (11404)	1/9/1999 9:38:00 PM
From: .Trev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

iNTERESTING COMMENT

To: Andrew who wrote (11404)	1/9/1999 9:50:00 PM
From: kidl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

Andrew, Looks like your calculation is in line with what the market expects and could live with even if the three stones were a fluke. What if their value would represent 75% of the value as JK is suggesting? kidl

To: Andrew who wrote (11404)	1/9/1999 10:26:00 PM
From: .Trev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

Hi Andy My only comment is to look at the other fraction of diamonds. If you take out the 3 stones you're left with 204 cts of smaller stuff including some over 1 ct if I remember rightly. If you split the 68000 odd 50/50 that works out to about 166/ ct for the smaller stuff. that could probably be subdivided again but we don't have the info, and if we did what is it going to tell us?? We really have to wait for the size distribution statistics to get further insight into the income probabilities, and I'm not into speculating about coming information. I'd rather wait for the information and then think about what it means.