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 : ABER RESOURCES -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: George J. Tromp who wrote (1275)	4/10/1999 9:25:00 AM
From: Gord Bolton	Respond to of 2006

Message 8693548 I see that you would prefer to talk about other topics. I take it that you conceed that your statements have no basis in reality. techstocks.com May we infer from your drilling and unsubstantiated remarks that you are long ABZ and short of WSP and have lost your objectivity? Were you in line for a juicy private placement in Aberex prior to it hitting the market George? Your unwillingness to answer the question would imply that you were. Shouldn't a newsletter writer disclose their bias prior to making their comments? What kind of disclosure policy do you have George. Do you pump the companies that provide you with shill shares, inside info and juicy private placements and slander those who do not? Why didn't Aber provide a price breakdown of each stone? Could it be that their largest stone wasn't worth squat? I'm not saying that it was or wasn't, but it could be. That is why you submit the parcel and get a value on the parcel when you are doing bulk samples. Then you report the overall value per carat. If Hanna had as problem with the way the report was made wouldn't he have and obligation to say something publicly right away. What did he say anyway George? "Gee that looks real good. We are in again-maybe. Sure a lot better than anything we found in Greenland. Too bad we lost percentage." Individual valuations of each stone may be interesting but are not generally provided by any diamond company except in exceptional circumstances like a five carat pink or a +50 carat gem. And further George, if you were paying attention to the information that was available prior to the 200 tonne sample you would have known that Snap Lake had a course grade predictive of large diamonds, had high diamond counts in all samples, and that the chemistry indicated that the environment was conducive to diamond preservation and that one might predict large high quality diamonds in any bulk sample. The fact that you did not know this and perhaps do not understand it today tells us something about you. The fact that you would belabour us with your lack of understanding and even make snide, cryptic, misleading and critical comments about Winspear and blame them for your lack of comprehension tells us volumes about you.

To: George J. Tromp who wrote (1275)	4/10/1999 12:23:00 PM
From: teevee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2006

George, <<Now you want to promote this stock based on the either or scenario of 301US per carat or 95US per carat. The worse side scenario is this is a highly touted high price speculation, the best case scenario is Winspear will deliver. If they deliver based on 3.5 million tons, at 301US per carat , 350 US per ton , they have a 1.2 bill dollar deposit, if they deliver 3.5mill tons at 95US per carat they have a 332 million dollar deposit. Where is the reward at current prices.? If you want to count total tonnage Aber has well over 74Mil inplied and 37Mil drill proven at 240US per ton fully proved fully delineated and shortly the feasibility study will confirm its prospectivity.>>> It certainly hasn't taken you long as a paid shill to get fairly slick in your presentations....I suggest you have a look at the figure attached to the last WSP press release which shows drill hole locations to scale and average thicknesses....counting all drill holes from the last three years in the west, east south and north shores of Snap Lake and in Snap Lake, there is conservatively over 30 million tonnes drill indicated and at least that much again implied, and the cone sheet is open....lets see now, the reward at current prices at$301 a carat and $US 350 a tonne is that WSP could deliver a $21 billion undiscounted deposit...not too bad at all...

To: George J. Tromp who wrote (1275)	4/10/1999 12:41:00 PM
From: WillP	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2006

Perspective? Strange perspective.... If you will note this is prior to mini-bulk or large diameter core drilling into the pipes. You will also note that the full drill core was shipped to lakefield research lab. So your premise is already full of holes. Yes...it is prior to any bulk sampling. That's entirely my point. There were no details provided on any of the subsequent bulk samples to the degree that Winspear provided. As to the full core being shipped...what's your point? All one need do is look at the kimberlite intersection thickness and weight processed, and one can quickly determine what was shipped. The entire core from A154-2 (discovery) was also shipped to the lab. I'm assuming that since they didn't tell you that...you aren't aware of it? But again...what's your point. How does Diavik shipping the entire core to the lab blow holes in my premise? Good grief! My premise...is that Winspear has consistently matched or exceeded the amount of information provided by the Diavik Diamond Project at every level of exploration. Oh...by the way...when did Aber cease to be the operator of Diavik? Recall the date? Again... my point is rather simple...that is...easy to comprehend. Winspear has provided better information at all levels of assessment than has the Diavik Diamond Project. Simple. Any doubting souls out there...check for yourself. George has provided a typical Aber release of caustic fusion results. Compare it to Winspear's January 26 1999 release. Compare it to Winspear's 1997 releases on CF results from limited dyke samples, and from the boulders. Go ahead. Tell me where Aber provides more complete information. As for the mini bulk samples...well, I will assume you have conceded the point, in the absence of any hard information to the contrary. You keep harping on the fact that 75% of the value is in three diamonds. So what? Is this unusual? Did the release of this information by Kaiser and subsequently by Winspear totally blindside you? Anyone who knows anything about diamonds could have told you that. Heck...even George Tromp could have told you that. Here's an excerpt from post 6109 on the Winspear Resources thread: So here is my prognosis for future overall valuation and how it was obtained. 18 stones of 1 carat min.(Stones reported by Winspear may be larger) 18 x 335(Low end of value) = 6030 US 1 stone 10 carat = 3500 US per carat 1 stone 8 carat = 1800 US per carat 1 stone 6 carat = 1000 US per carat +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Total value 61400US Now...clearly you weren't surprised by the value being contained in the three largest stones then...right? :-) Actually...in that post...you predicted a potential total value of $72,560 for the entire parcel. So, let's see. The 10.8 ct stone is worth $37,800, the 8.4 ct. stone is worth $15,100, and the 6 ct. stone is worth $6,000. That's a total of $58,900. Now...I make $58,900 divided by $72,560 a little over 81% of the total value being in the top three stones. So...why the surprise? You say... If you want to count total tonnage Aber has well over 74Mil inplied and 37Mil drill proven at 240US per ton fully proved fully delineated and shortly the feasibility study will confirm its prospectivity. Now surely that's hype. Where do you get well over 74 million tonnes of implied tonnage? I'm a big Aber fan...but...geez. And at $240 US per tonne? A154-South exceeds that...for 12 million tonnes. A-418 roughly equals that...for 9 million tonnes. A154-North? Well let's assume the entire 11.5 million tonnes are to be mined...and the $35 US valuation is incorrect. Use 60 times 2.4 ct/tonne. That's only $144 per tonne. A21? Most optimistic guess is 5 million tonnes at 2.7...ahh...call it 3.0 carats per tonne. Again...ignore the actual valuation and call it $60. That's 180 per tonne. That's a total of 37.5 million tonnes. Pure and simple. Not all are in the mine plan. Not even close. Value? Well...even using these inflated numbers...the average value is only $220 per tonne. Maybe you wish to revisit the definition of "hype", and "promotion". Have an even better day.