RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Goldstorm resource estimate: +/- 8.6 million oz for 300Hrockport1 wrote: Your estimates are interesting. I haven't done any detailed look at the non-300 horizon, so for those zones, I'm completely guessing based on the "eyeball" test. However, I do believe that these other two zones combined currently have less resources defined than the 300 zone. In other words, I think they are currently less than the approximately 8 million oz Au we are estimating. At best, maybe equal in size; therefore up to an additional 8 million.
As far as MI&I, another guess. For the total Goldstorm perhaps the something like 6 million Measured & Indicated, plus another 8 million Inferred? Again, this is just a guess, no number crunching involved beyond what my 300H envelope says.
I think there are a couple ways to approach the difference. One is that IronCap is showing 33 million ounces Au in all categories. When I match IC against Goldstorm, it's Goldstorm that has the higher grades (by quite a bit) and greater thickness as well. IC is .49g/t, Goldstorm is .67g/t. IC is no larger than Goldstorm in terms of the deposit footprint.
Another difference is the huge average grade x thickness that I show in the full Goldstorm results vs. just the 300H. For 300H I show 291m average thickness. For all of Goldstorm I show 585m average mineralized thickness per hole and for a larger footprint.
Finally, at 1.33B tons of total gold-bearing ore, I'm not far from past KK statements that Goldstorm is a billion-ton deposit.
If I'm off at all, it's in my eyeball calculation of the total Goldstorm footprint. I know the press releases have been saying 1100 meters in length and I'm using only 950, but I haven't seen a total deposit width - I'm using 850 meters wide. That's 807,500 square meters. If it turns out to be 1,100 x 600, say, that would be 660,000 square meters and my number would go down by 18.3% to 23.35 million for Goldstorm total, but it would remain at 8.1 million oz for 300H. I'm open to input on the deposit width since I don't see any clear statements from Tudor on that. But I still see Goldstorm as comparable to IC, so I'll be surprised if it comes in lower, and I'd be looking at what might cause a difference between the two - principally different methods I think.