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 : WillP Speaks on Winspear -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tomato who wrote (25)	2/19/1999 11:16:00 PM
From: Rocket Red	Respond to of 177

Tomato Thanks for posting that!!!!!! Cheers

To: Tomato who wrote (25)	2/19/1999 11:51:00 PM
From: teevee	Respond to of 177

Tomato, <<<Oh behalf of everyone who visits here, including, I would guess, Walt, teevee, Fix, wayne cath, Marcos, .Trev, and red, to name a few who come to mind, kindly bugger off.>>>> Oh nooooo, you used the "b" word...we will never get rid of average joe now......

To: Tomato who wrote (25)	2/20/1999 1:19:00 PM
From: teevee	Respond to of 177

Tomato, Author: The RESOURCE INDICATOR -- Date:1999-02-20 08:45:13 Subject: I am all mixed up - No garden without its weeds WillP, DECLARATION: I own some stock and have recommended it in the newsletter as much lower prices. I have had the same thoughts in the past. I have asked Winspear in the past regarding overall gem percentage of large stones versus gem percentage of smaller stones. They have decided, with some good reason, not to discuss this yet. If past data can be used, in a very crude manner, to take a guess, I would say 20-30% of the entire population of stones may be of gem quality (white and transparent). I am sure you will agree that this range can be assigned a high probability of coming true. Also, the population of stones may be a mixture of various samplings from within the source(s) as duscussed in the Jan. 27/99 issue: ".... THE SIZE OF THE STACK IS AS IMPORTANT AS THE QUALITY OF THE CARDS The results are complex and can lead to as many questions as answers. One intelligent inquiry would be if there is any evidence that the micro and macro diamonds were sourced from a different population or genesis of diamonds. If this is the case, can the size distribution curve be used to predict the existence of larger diamonds and eventually grades? In any eruption, you will get a variety of geneses, as you do in the indicator minerals. Data from the caustic fusion results is still being interpreted. Winspear has not yet had a chance to look at the physical characteristics of the micro-diamonds in order to compare it to the physical characteristics of the macro-diamonds recovered from the 200 tonne sample. The data to date indicates that the micro-diamonds co-exist with the macros in a uniform magmatic mix. The family of diamonds, whether sampled from a single or multiple source population of diamonds, will be uniform throughout the dyke. If this is the case for the remainder of the dyke, than the size distribution curve, as it is developed, will be an effective tool to predict the grade of the dyke. The micro-macro model is necessary because sampling the dyke with conventional drilling will not provide enough macro-diamonds for resource estimation. An observation of the kimberlite intersection to date, by the Winspear consultants, does not indicate any phasing within the dyke. The development of the size distribution curve is a complex exercise and can be affected by several criteria. These include unrepresentative sampling, insufficient sampling, poor recovery of stones and incorrect size distribution due to breakage of diamonds during processing. The accuracy of any micro-macro model will probably continue to be debated. Dr. Thurston is still going through results and WSP has simply released the best information to date. ...." It is also important to note that the larger stones of poor quality were broken. Sincerely, Sudhir Khanna, P.Eng. Editor, The RESOURCE INDICATOR