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 Afri-Can Marine Minerals Corporation V.AFA

TSXV:AFA - Post Discussion

View:
Post by FKloster on Mar 16, 2011 12:15pm

curious on why

the report on page 28 stated that there was a drill extension available but was not used! It would have increased the sampling depth from 8 meters to 12 meters.

Why was this extension not used? Only management can answer that. I imagine there is a reason- wonder what it is?
Comment by FKloster on Mar 16, 2011 12:21pm
woops - the report I read is different than the below link. I read the report from the AFA website under technical reports. Nevertheless, I am still curious why the extension was not used.
Comment by FKloster on Mar 16, 2011 12:27pm
Page 33 on the link below that was provided.
Comment by arpagon29 on Mar 16, 2011 12:57pm
FKloster,10 Minutes after the Corporation issues a great news that confirm that Management is actually making certain that the project is advancing, you still find a way to go ahead and take another stab at management ! Wow how pathetic !For me the most important point in the report is the date, January 2011, that means that when afa management was stating that the report report review was being ...more  
Comment by FKloster on Mar 16, 2011 2:04pm
Perhaps that is the reason...!" So if the majority of the sample are in area were the 8 meters penetration is sufficient then, you plan your programme around that fact...The reason the extension struck me so was that later in the report it stated something about the possibility of a higher concetration of doamonds closer to the bedrock. i.e. if we could have gone deeper we MAY have had ...more  
Comment by arpagon29 on Mar 16, 2011 6:06pm
Now Further to your question, I forwarded and email to afa management and this is the reply I received... Dear XXX,The reason why they did not use the extension to drill down to 12 meters is that the extension can only be installed at port. The tool has a normal penetration of 8 meters and the extension adds 4 meters. In a reconnaissance sampling program, if the survey shows that the majority ...more  
Comment by FKloster on Mar 17, 2011 7:57am
Thanks for the reply. Although the latter comments are uncalled for. As I stated before on other posts it is my OPINION that management is overpaid. I still contend this to be true.As far as you implying I did not read the last news release - you are wrong on that. What did I say that was untrue/bull?What was untrue/bull- answer that.The news release did state that an extension was available but ...more  
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