Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Alpha Minerals Inc ESOFD



GREY:ESOFD - Post by User

Comment by Raptor7on Mar 13, 2013 11:28pm
283 Views
Post# 21127231

RE: RE: RE: 30m strike length

RE: RE: RE: 30m strike length

Delta

 

Sorry, I can't help you with any details either.  But for what it's worth, I've heard stories of two people carrying single boxes of high-grade core because they were just too awkward for one to carry.  However, for all I know this could be just one of them "heard from a friend of a friend" things.   But having said this, I see that Cameco provides a history of its McArthur River developments and I note it states they went underground in 1994, announced a 35% increase in reserves in 1999 and a further increase of 50% in 2001.

 

https://www.cameco.com/mining/mcarthur_river/history_and_innovations/

 

I am guessing that the initial 35% increase had much to do with standard infill drilling and increased confidence in known zones of mineralization.  However, I am pretty sure the 50% increase announced at the end of 2000 had nothing to do with increasing the strike length of known mineralization by 50% and much more to do with finding a surprisingly high-grade plum within the known strike of mineralization.  If there is math out there that can prove my statement completely out to lunch, well then I apologize but I would be remiss if I didn't point out that I said "LARGELY attributable to".

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>