Peregrine Diamonds Ltd. PGDIF

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:news

[xDeBeers]

The dike to the NW of CH-6 is not that thick. The intersections are not that significant. The angled holes can be misleading also. If you think about the geometry of reporting the thickness of a vertical prism (dike) with an angled hole, the intercepted width is not the true width. That is the intercept sounds better than it is.

A little bit surprised they focussed on holes to the north-west of CH-6. The mag and gravity only indicates thin dikes with one or two blows -where it gets wider. They where never going to be that good. South east of CH-6 however the magnetics shows nothing (which is OK) but the gravity shows a big broad low, but there is not enough data covereage. I would be more interested in testing dikes and bigger blows to the south of CH-6.

Marsfontein in RSA was only 2-4 metres wide and kilomters long. It was mined out in a few years and the enrichment at surface was running at 3000cpt, the richest diamond ore I have ever worked on. So the technology and expertise to mine kimberlite dikes exists - if they are rich enough.

I like the new talk of the "phase 1" kimberlites. They are going to focus on getting enough tonnage into the mine then finding the rest of the diamondiferous kimberllites at much less cost when the mine is running. This of course means less exploration upside news releases and more business as usual news releases as they progress through the phases of mine development. 

I hope they use a bit of exploration money each year for some hail mary's. Metals, Area B etc. It is more fun and exciting that way.