Barkerville Gold Mns Ltd BGMZF

RE: RE: RE: Cabsav and other preschoolers

[hammer161]

Geez Bigbab, getting testy as your money continues to sit in this thing and does nothing?  Starting to yell and call people names? I had thought more of you than that. All my post was trying to do was point out that more data does not necessarily mean more resources as many here will think it does. The last time we conversed by PM when this fiasco first started up (many months ago), your guess as to ounces was 2.5M to 3M. Now i see that your guess is 6M - so perhaps I inferred from that that you felt that the data will have a positive influence - my apologies. I  will maintian my original 2M - 2.5M guess.    

 

Also for clarification, drill holes are not data points. Data points will come from every location  down the drill holes where a sample was taken. These can be over the entire hole if it was all sampled - but my guess is that the historic holes were only sampled where the geologists thought they might get gold. in n this case there may well be a lot more than 1100 new data points (I can't get that same number from  what you provided but no matter). Whether they are useful or not will be the key. I  suspect that many will be shallow or in the immediate vicinity of the historically mined out area - in which case they will not add much, other than to perhaps limit the size of the grade shells. We will need to seee the report.  IMO the longer that this goes on the greater the likelihood that the resource will come in at the lower end of the guess range - as it will be BGM delaying things further as they go back to Snowden and whining about how few ounces are in the compliant report.