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 Diaminds (Bulls Board) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (96)	2/1/1999 5:48:00 AM
From: Tomato	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1172

I just wrote Jill and suggest others do so if they don't like what just happened here in the last 2 posts.

To: E. Charters who wrote (96)	2/1/1999 5:54:00 AM
From: marcos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1172

Eric, they've already given out more data than anybody else. At least I think that's true. Can you name an outfit that has 1. explored better in your opinion 2. supplied to the public more detailed data 3. found anywhere near these valuations and 4. made me more money [ha! gotcha there]

To: E. Charters who wrote (96)	2/1/1999 8:44:00 AM
From: Rocket Red	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1172

E.Charters I hope you really have Changed your mind on Wsp. Cheers

To: E. Charters who wrote (96)	2/1/1999 9:28:00 AM
From: Chad Barrett	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1172

<< I am not sure I can easily assess the statistical significance of the results myself. >> Well said EC! The information provided does not allow us to determine too much in a statistically accurate way. However, it is possible to make a reasonable calculation on the variability of the diamond distribution in the dyke. Beyond that.... ? Oh yeah, and there also was a very good carat/tonne value just based on the 3 largest stones that were reported. << Such a small deposit actually may waste much money in testing. >> I agree and disagree... I disagree with your statement that the deposit is "small". The boundaries of the dykes have not been found yet, so an assumption to the final size cannot reasonably be made yet! I agree that a lot of money will be required (more than usual) to prove up this dyke system. If you had a pipe you could just drill into it, get the necessary tonnage, and make your mining decision. With a dyke, it would seem to require tightly spaced (25m centres or 50m centres or something like that?) grid drilling to be able to confidantly say, "this area has been drill tested as a proven resource". This dyke system actually seems more like a gold/copper/ nickle type deposit in the way it has to be explored? With the high $/tonne value of the diamonds being found though, this shouldn't be a problem. Like everyone keeps saying (and they are correct in saying it), the bulk sample will tell all. Chad