Friends on BorssnackTo my Swedish friends on Borssnack,
Drear dr. K.Bio, I do not see any added value making the following comments:
==========================================================================
AFA:NEWS [29]
dr. K Bio 10-10-25 19:29:12 Anmäl inlägget
Ska bli kul att se vilka ursäkter den lilla fransktalande grodan kommer med för något nu...
"les porcs stupides suédoise"
AFA NEWS [29] Link to this page
dr. K Bio 10-10-25 19:29:12 Report post
Should be fun to see what excuses the small French-speaking frog comes with something for now ...
'Les porc stupide Suédoise "
================================================================================
Especially from some one that seem to be making sensible comments...
Now having read the translated version of many of your post, I must say that I am surprised by the level of interpretation you guys are doing with information given, and let me take this opportunity to give some clarity on some points made.
==================================================================================
Original Post:
AFA:NEWS [51]
burgardsgatan12 12:15:43
Anmäl inlägget
Tycker att tva saker med rapporten ar valdigt konstiga, nagot som far mig att ifragasatta om Pierre ar ratt man att leda foretaget och ocksa Fosters kompetens.
1) Hur kan de ha lagt griden sa fel att endast 1.7 km2 gick att konvertera till inferred. Tanken var ju att det var tillrackligt med hal for att undersoka 26km2
2) Hur sjutton kan det ha undgatt grabbarna att man inte raknar carat/m2 langre utan stenar/m2 * storleken pa stenarna. Pierre o Dick har hela tiden hallit sig till c/m2? Sjalvklart ar det ju mycket mer logiskt att rakna sasom Z Star gor men det kunde de formedlat innan.
Nagon far garna maila honom o fraga.
Google translate.?burgardsgatan12 12:15:43 Report post
Seems to me that two things with the report's very strange, something that makes me question whether Pierre is the right man to lead the fore at a time and also Foster's skills.
1) How could they have put the grid so wrong that only 1.7 km2 went to convert inferred. The idea was that it was sufficient to hal to investigate 26km2
2) How the hell could it have escaped the guys that you do not count carat/m2 longer without stenar/m2 * size of the rocks. O Pierre Dick has always stuck to c/m2? Obviously, it is of course much more logical to be counted for Z Star issues but could they convey before.
Someone feel free to email him o ask.
==================================================================================
Regarding you point 1, were, in the Corporation information, did you get the idea that the unbiassed grid would cover such a large area ? From my reading of the press release and the power points on the subject I did not come to that conclusion...
Your point two is actually the center of the results interpretation, and its clear that you are passing judgement without understanding the nature of exploration....
Should the Corporation have spent time explaining the obvious: Grades = (Stones / square M * Size (cts/stn)...
Now, if you read latest power points, slide 14, you will notice that the historical average diamonds size found near the Tsauchab River and EPL 2499 is above 0.20 (cts/stn), closer to 0.21 (cts/stn)...
Unfortunately, even if the two biggest stones ever found on block J were on Feature 8 (0.64 ct), to date, the average size found on Feature 8 to date is 0.12 (cts/stn), while in Feature 6 the average diamond size was approximately the same as the regional average size of 0.21 carats/stone.
The influence of the size cannot be over rated, the difference between the two feature results is 1.75 time, therefore had we found the regional average, our Inferred Resource would be 1.75 higher...
Of bigger interest is the fact that near EPL 3403, the regional average size of 0.45 carats/stone, therefore assuming that we just find the same stones / square M grade in EPL 3403, our resource would be 3.75 higher....and that does not even take into consideration the higher price per carat we could get...
So its very clear that, while Block J could very well allows AFA to identify 1 million carat reserve over time, that AFA real blue sky project going forward is EPL 3403...
My Final comment for my friends in Sweden is address to Jjämför.
======================================================================================
He wrote that:
their assumptions from 2010-03-02 and 2010-10-12:
March
Diamond Price 210 USD / carat
Production cost 60 000 USD / day
70% ownership block J
October
Diamond Price 260 USD / carat
Production cost 80 000 USD / day
100% ownership block J
In March took 0.115 c/m2 for profitability. Now it is 0.123 c/m2.
Know that figure 0.09 c/m2 used here but not where it comes from.
Then I had also missed the fact that they now own the entire block J - or have they missed the self that they do not do it? :-)
==================================================================================
Before passing comments, please read the document completely,
if you had, you would have notice that document is a theoretical model that is valid for both EPL 2499 (block J) and EPL 3403, therefore since the percentage is 100% for EPL 3403 and 70 % for EPL 2499, the number are not inaccurate nor misleading...
Investors should come to realized that AFA is now more then just EPL 2499 Block J, but EPL 2499 + EPL 3403 + Haib Copper project...