RE: RE: RE: RE: Some English Major Has Produced AnBecause he says this on his site:
"Well, the Miwah resource estimate came out last week, not at 11-15 million ounces as suggested by people far more qualified than I, but (with a 0.6 g/t cutoff) at 2.57 million ounces. Hmmm… The news release cites 103.9 million tonnes at 0.94 g/t on average, showing 3.14 million ounces at a cutoff of 0.2 g/t. For a site accessible only by helicopter, wanting in infrastructure, a 0.2 gram cutoff seems to this English major a bit on the low side."
The inference here is that if the cutoff had not been at 0.2 g then the resource estimate would have come in lower - it would in fact would have been in line with the English major's projection. Furthermore, if all you were pointing out was the new prospect SA then that would be fine. The fact of the matter is that there is an implied inference on the web site that it should be either EAS or SA (and preferably SA). All I am saying is that there is more to the cutoff grade than accessibility by a helicopter and infrastructure and he should take that into account. Furthermore, he is a shareholder in SA and his site is a testament to that. Maybe he is biased. I wish him the best but he should discard his philosophy - "It is not enough that I should win, you must also lose"