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 (12255)	1/17/1999 1:35:00 AM
From: Chad Barrett	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26850

<< Good evening Chad. Great post. Excellent thoughts. One thing that I missed in this latest NR is from which pit did the smaller stones (1 ct. to 5 ct.) come from. Am I missing something here? Please clarify this for me. Seven came from Pit one (What's the various sizes of the seven) and the remaining 15 came from Pit 2. Please clarify. >> I'm not sure what you need clarification on?? You stated the facts yourself, but I'll type them out again here. Pit 1 Pit 2 3 largest diamonds - 1 2 remaining 22 diamonds - 7 15 tonnes taken from pit - 105.7 94 carats taken from pit - 90.69 138.21 carats per tonne - 0.86 1.47 Some of this info was quoted by whiskeyjack as being from the June news release (I didn't go back to check, but I trust he was quoting accurately?) The ratio of the "large diamonds" ( >1 carat ) is approx. 2:1 in favour of pit 2 - this despite the fact that there was slightly more material taken from pit 1. The average size of the 22 diamonds greater than 1 carat (not including the "big 3") is about 1.93 carats (just an interesting fact). Since 2/3rds of the "large diamonds" are from pit 2, the best we can do is assume that 2/3rds of the total carats of the top 25 diamonds is also from pit 2. We can then look at the breakdown of the "smaller diamonds" ( <1 carat ). Pit 1 Pit 2 diamonds <1 carat (in carats) - 68.12 93.06 tonnes taken from pit - 105.7 94 carats per tonne - 0.644 0.99 This shows that the "large diamonds" seem to be "relatively" in line with the overall results from each pit. This would seem to indicate that the distribution of diamonds in each pit is similar (as far as sizing curve would go - from what little information we have). However, it also seem that 1 pit was more diamondiferous than the other. This could be a reason to "freak out and run for the exits", except for the fact that both pits produced "large diamonds" in abundance, and both pits appear to be exhibiting the same diamonds distribution characteristics. The fact that pit 1 appears to be systematically lower in grade than pit 2 could be a statistically insignificant fact. (the significance all depends on how representative the sample is of the total dyke - the sample size was relatively small, and the number of samples taken (2 different 100 tonne samples) was relatively small... therefore the statistical significance of the results is worth "a pile o'dung".... tying the pit data in with the CF data from the drill holes will give results of statistical significance (to the few people who know how to properly interpret it). Anyways... I hope that clears some things up for you Fixer? Chad PS - Yes, I am a Mathematics major... grin...