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

Alpha Minerals Inc ESOFD



GREY:ESOFD - Post by User

Comment by leverage1971on Mar 17, 2013 11:58am
307 Views
Post# 21142044

RE: RE: RE: RE: Elements of a

RE: RE: RE: RE: Elements of a

Waste of time but here goes anyway. Crabhouse and Mdrfan69

Holes 30, 34 and 36 reported no significant mineralization (this information is public

as part of a table on the newest March 2013 Presentation on Alpha's website) and true these holes

were not named in the NR released on February 25th.It doesn't take alot of brainpower or math skills

to understand that 3 of the ten holes were not reported because there was nothing there.

 However the other 7 holes in this 10 hole package showed significant (5 of them)  to weak (2 of them)

mineralization. The only argument one could make is that the company could have put

the chart from the presentation at the bottom of the NR. My first thought is

who cares? and my second thought is to look at their style of reporting and suffice it to say it is

diverse. Should the report of read "Step out holes on 5 of 10 show significant mineralization but OH NO! 3

are TOTAL DUDS!" Sorry couldn't resist but really if you don't like the stock or have an agenda nothing

they do will suffice and nothing others (like me) say will matter.

Some results are tabled when it is in the interests of the shareholder and the company

to do so as is the case with the NR on March 11th which collated Drill hole 38 with 44 and 46 as well as

hole 51. This showed that the 390E discovery was open to the east of PLS 38 and north but seemingly

not to the south. Pretty accurate reporting and not all "rah rah hey hey" as you have insinuated... otherwise

PLS 46 would have been left out.

PLS 42 and 44 were drilled 2.2 km away from Zone 0E  and didn't show mineralization but were reported

anyway and show geological features that geologists get excited about. Great! again let them do their job

can't say I am upset with what has been done so far.

If you actually take the time and go to Fission's website as well you will notice that

https://www.fission-energy.com/s/pattersonlakesouth.asp the  gamma logs include

all the holes even the ones with little or no evidence of mineralization or radioactivity. Piece

this together with the Alpha presentation and all of the NR's and the question that begs asked

of you and your pals are what holes are you talking about that are unreported.

30, 34 and 36? seriously!? that is reason for caution?

The complete map of the "proposed" 2013 drill locations is on neither website I am guessing because as

promised by the management team it has changed because of Zone 390E. Awesome! unless of course

this is another part of the conspiracy against shareholders. Good chance that holes 41, 43, 45, 47, 49

and 50 haven't been drilled yet. Maybe you saved the map from early January and because of their location

and the Zone 390E discovery you would see they got put off to drill other locations based on PLS 38.

Time will tell but I think your agenda or beef prevents you from being objective. There are some pretty savvy

people on this board and so if you are going to throw stones please be sure to have "facts" to support your

throws otherwise wear "armour" because many of us will take the time to call bul*&%it if need be.

Full disclosure I have held DML.TO for 2 years and yes it has sat in this range for over a year.

Lev

 

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>