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: The Fix who wrote (12228)	1/16/1999 11:37:00 PM
From: Chad Barrett	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26850

<< Hello Jim. The problem one is faced is where would one fit in all the smaller pebbles.....Pit 1 or 2. The factor is that 22 rocks were from 1ct. to 5ct. range. I feel that we need more info out of WSP as to which pits this rocks were pulled from. Than one can make a better assesment. >> That information is in the latest news release. One pit appeared to have more diamonds than the other. The difference was notable, but not enough to raise a serious red flag for me.... I still think that WSP will see a nice speculative run before the 6000 tonne bulk sample results are out. One good point to make is that if WSP was "salting" the mini-bulk samples - they would NOT have made one pit noticeably better than the other.... The only concern this raises is the "consistancy" of the diamonds throughout the dyke. However, both pits had a considerable amount of diamonds. Considering the relatively small sample sizes (100 tonnes per pit) getting slightly skewed results is not to be unexpected. The CF results will be more revealing on how consistant the dyke is, but with the small samples that each core represent (approx. 2.5m of kimberlite ain't that much per drill hole) there will still be considerable fluctuations that are to be expected statistically. Very few people will be able to truly interpret that data and properly do a statistical analysis to determine the variability, and possibly a confidence interval for the results. In other words, most of us will be left to trust managements view of the results - which obviously will be positive. Well, that's enough blabbering for now... this NR should cause the trend to reverse back to an uptrend again. I stated that I felt WSP would come back to fill the gap, and now it has! There definitely was a downtrend being established at this point, but it doesn't take much to shift the market's sentiment. Chad