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

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum MGX Minerals Inc MGXMF

MGX Minerals Inc. is a Canada-based diversified resource and technology company with interests in advanced materials, metals, and energy technologies. The Company’s portfolios include Magnesium, Silicon, Lithium, Gold, and Silver. Its Magnesium projects include Driftwood Creek, Marysville, Red Mountain Group and Botts Lake. Its Silicon projects include Gibraltar, Koot and Wonah. Its Lithium... see more

GREY:MGXMF - Post Discussion

MGX Minerals Inc > 2001 - DRIFTWOOD CREEK - ASSAY REPORT
View:
Post by Wangotango67 on Sep 23, 2022 11:26pm

2001 - DRIFTWOOD CREEK - ASSAY REPORT

FEW POINTS OF INTEREST -
1- assay report predates - ownership by MGX
2 - assay report was private - commissionby by Geologist, part / previous / owner

An assay, can make or break a project.
If not all minerals are assayed - junior too cheap - they just won't know.

If a geologist comes along, he'll want to know what the rock or ore hosts, 
that's where his - pay dirt - is...  knowing what's all in the ores, commands all the more monies.
That's how the system works...
Geologists find the claims, sell them to the juniors.
Well, most of the time.

PETER  KLEWCHUCK -
Was the Geologait that collected rock samples on Driftwood Creek,
and sent them in for Assaying

Good job he did.
He actually had enough sense to scope for multiple minerals.

Page 12 -
I findis quite important -
It speaks about the former - Kaiser bulk samples - and how the chip rock samples sent in
were similar results to that of the - BULK SAMPLE - ( Kaiser )
Kaiser report - i have tried ot trackdown for sometime now.
Nothing... Some links - are duds. ( 404 )

EXCERPT -
Analytical results of smaller. representative portions of three of the bulk samples are comparable to data gathered by chip sampling along one cross section line of the deposit (Appendix 1). This material provides a representative sampling of some of the magnesite and is now available for metallurgical testing if warranted.


Rock Samples by... Geologist
concur with - bulk sampled ore - by Kaiser -
Quite important.
All because - many other minerals - present themselves in the Geologist -  assay report
on page 17 - link below - .that don't show up in the MGX assay reports.Was he referring to
all minerla data - or - just Mg ?

The bulk sample - Kaiser - was 2,300 kg.
2001 rock chips realativly match the bulk sampled ore.
If one reads this bulk sample section carefully, there were 2 bulk samples taken.
Kaiser
Kasier + Canoxy.

Page 17 -
Describes the size of the samples -
0.200 GM
WHOLE ROCK
Lithium Bo2 Infusion assay - then fired for 1 hour.
Sample Type - R 150
Testing the - MgO -  content.

One could assume the rock chip samples were - 0.200 gram.
Or... 0.200 gravitomical weight. ( describing density of ore )

Either or....
the fact remains - ROCK CHIP -  samples were sent in.
Not boulders - not - tonnage - simple rock chips.
They   concurred with the - former bulk tested ores.


Here's the - 2001 - assay report -

 https://cmscontent.nrs.gov.bc.ca/geoscience/PropertyFile/PAP/2001/2001-28.pdf


Now... i'm not a big fan of lab reports.
They just don't provide the intel needed to an investor in which to determine how they
arrived at their - mineral value assessment.

Rock weights are not clearly - stated.
At no time do they show calculations that scale the rock chip weight to a tonnage value.
One has to assume - all values are per - ton, tonne.

When it comes to - ppm, it most often refers to - ppm - liter.
Perhaps my biggest - irk - with lab assays. ( lol )

IF ONE WERE TO -
Analyze the assay  report on page 17 - does it suggest anywhere the rock chips were scaled
to per tonne ?

Or - should one assume the - mineral content values - are based on - mineral content of
rock chip ?

See the difference ?
Suppose one of the rock chips amounted to 1 kg
a niobium value of - 14 ppm- would increase by - 1000x - based on 1000 kg in a tonne.

Would it not compare to ?
I give you a rockchip - i ask you to weigh it.
You say - 1 kg
I then ask... test it for mineral content.
You tell me - there is.... 42% Mgo content with in the rock - along with Nb of 14 ppm.

Let's break it down -
Percentages will always provide an over all percentage. 
if there's 10% mineral value in a rockchip.
And all other rock chips that add up to - 1,000 kg also have 10% mineral content
then... it will still be 10 % total mineral content.

Rock Chip weighing - 1 kg - having 14 ppm Nb - taken out -
and i do the same to another 999 rock chips weighing 1 kg
How much Nb would i have ?
14,000 ppm Nb.

And this is why... i'm not a fan of,
seeing percentages and ppm in an assay  -  report.

Hnece - reassay the Driftwood.
Don't focus on the Magnesite.
Which all former parties did.

Focus on the colored dolomites.
My hunch says... far higher - ree - potential.


Cheers....
Be the first to comment on this post
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities