Barkerville Gold Mns Ltd BGMZF

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Explanation of previous post

[yaponski]

yaponski wrote:

GoldExecute wrote: Jrai, Have never been fired from any job..... Also, If you don't spend the time to understand what is going on, how can you take a position.  I still think at some point there may be a place to enter this, but before I would buy, I would make sure I understand what reality is relative to what the company has said.   
 

GoldEx,
Well put.  It does take experience to understand these results.

I'd appreciate your opinion on 

1. Are the differences between original and reassay results within the variance expected, based on your experience?
2. Would the additional data likely increase or decrease the resource estimate? Since the gram-meter figure dropped, I would expect a drop in any resource estimate that relied on the original assays that were subsequently revised downwards due to the more accurate assay methodology.

Thanks again for injecting some real analysis.

One more question, if you had a gram-meter figure on the entire data base of holes used in the original resource estimate and then you had a new gram-meter figure update on all of the holes, would you typically expect that the updated resource estimate would drop if the new gram-meter figure had dropped?  I based this assumption on the fact that gram-meter is widely used as a predictor and it wouldn't be much of a practical predictor if it didn't approximate the ultimate resource estimate.