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

Argex Titanium Inc. ARGEF

"Argex Titanium Inc is a Canadian company producing high-grade titanium dioxide (TiO2) pigment. The company has developed a chloride-based technology, which is environmentally sustainable. The white pigment produced by Argex is to be used in high-quality paints, plastics, specialty, and other applications."


GREY:ARGEF - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Post by canada7on May 24, 2011 10:07pm
230 Views
Post# 18620874

Resource at La Blache much larger

Resource at La Blache much larger
I wonder any one who reads the recent PR carefully again? I did.
"NI 43-101 compliant resource estimate including: 30,888,000 tonnes measured 
and indicated and 13,013,000 tonnes inferred resource estimate grading >44% 
iron (63.36% Fe2O3), >11% titanium (18.67% TiO2) and >0.24% vanadium
(0.43% V2O5)."
Read the old PR again:
"A ground magnetic survey was completed by  Prospecting Geophysics  in 1959 
(GM08681).  Bersimis Mining  completed 20 drill holes in 1964 (GM15462, GM15667 
and GM15992) intersecting significant iron and titanium (more than 45% Fe and 15% 
TiO2.). The MRNFQ examined approximately 300 metres of drill core sampling holes 4, 
7, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 17 as well as two outcrops for petrographic and chemical analyses. 
Three lenses were identified and were apparently aligned over a distance of 6 kilometres. 
The lenses vary from 100 metres to 1,130 metres in length and 45 metres to 215 metres in 
width (RG2002-01 and GM37408). Geochemical analyses tend to be consistent from one 
lens to the other (GM37408) averaging 50.4% Fe, 20.1% TiO2, 0.36% V2O5, 0.70% SiO2, 
7.41% Al2O3, 1.26% CaO, 4.05% MgO 0.19% Cr, 0.03% P and 0.02% S." 
Did every one see the difference?
The historical data said AVERAGE, but the new PR said ">". Thus, anything less than 44% iron, 11% titanium, and 0.24% vanadium is removed!
So the cut off in the new 43-101 is TOO HIGH. Let me illustrate this. Suppose, i have a core of 43% iron, 10.9% titanium and 0.23% vanadium, the core is considered no value by the recent 43-101 as it does not meet the cut-off criteria. How much money do we have in a ore body of 43% iron, 10.9% titanium, and 0.23% vanadium? $600 maybe per ton. But the 43-101 said ZERO because it does not meet the cut off criteria.
As we lower the cut-off, the resource will increase as more ore will qualify the cut-off. But what kinds of grades do we need to be profitable? Probably 50% will be enough, or even 25%. Other TiO2 companies are producing at 2% TiO2 grade, or about 10% of RGX's grade and they are profitable. 
Bullboard Posts