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: russet who wrote (811)	5/16/1999 5:24:00 PM
From: Tomato	Respond to of 1172

Is this what you're looking for? Author: WillP -- Date:1999-05-15 08:59:53 Subject: Deviants Mathematically speaking, of course. Some asked about standard deviations of the CF results some time ago. Here is what I have. Average numbers of +0.3 -1.18 normalized diamonds in 11 grid squares: 950 Standard deviation: 158 If one limits the results to only the squares with over 150 kg removed, the average stays the same (963) but the SD drops to about 75. As would be expected. Regards, WillP

To: russet who wrote (811)	5/16/1999 5:31:00 PM
From: .Trev	Respond to of 1172

Thanks but for goodness sake don't be worried. I suspect that Teevee is on the right tack and that someone else will be in control by the time production decisions are being taken. Snap is kind of like a hole card in a poker game (which is what this is). Seems to me the nature of the deposit is evolving in such a way that it is the threat of it going into production that is more important than the reality. If tonnage, grade, and value are what we think they are there are two major world class outfits, both of whom will likely feel they have to have control of Snap. Forget your basic training and forget the drill hole analysis, and all those other technical details, and just look at the way the development is being played and coaxed along. Just my viewpoint of course.