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: ddl who wrote (17428)	4/6/1999 7:27:00 AM
From: Confluence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

Hello Denis, Thanks for your response. I think you've made a couple errors in your calculations: 1. Assuming WSP has proven grade and value. This may become useful after bulk sample results in June/July, but is very dangerous to shareholders before large sampling is complete. Ask the Dentonia, Horseshoe, Kettle River folks about this 2. SUF's interest is 100% in the fissure mining. As mentioned in previous posts, this is additive to the present main mining operation at M1 (SUF 40%) and will begin without further major capital expenditure, in the next couple months! 3. Mine life on the fissures is dependent on tonnnage and capacity. So far the fissures have been proven at 2km length by 500m depth, with strike length at 30km, and the increasing expectation that the fissure system coincides with M1, small, but still the world's most valuable kimberlite pipe! Anecdotally, before the M1 was discovered, the fissures were expected to have a mine life well in excess of 20 years, just like many other fissure systems. That being said, WSP could demonstrate huge potential! I'm just saying that SUF already has it, so why the small difference in market cap? Regards, Confluence