OTCQX:BGMZF - Post by User
Comment by
hammer161on Aug 15, 2014 12:26pm
179 Views
Post# 22846604
RE:RE:RE:LOL Hammer ......... too funny
RE:RE:RE:LOL Hammer ......... too funny
BB - as per the report they did the $820K of sampling so they have 100% assay coverage in the holes. This is normally done the first time around on most projects. It does not necessarily mean that it is mineralized but it allows proper limits or domains to be placed on the volume for resource estimation. You may pick up some new sample intervals with grade but as I have said before, and you don't seem to understand, if it was passed by the first time it was probably because there site staff didn't think it was mineralized so don't expect huge increases there. As for the earlier data - did you actually read the press release pointed you at? 2007 and 2009 samples total 160 samples or 5% of the assay database including infill in those holes (no holes from 2008). About 40% are from 2007 and were not re-run. Babble on about the depth if you want - sure there is gold there, but it has yet to be proven it has the potential to be mined so will be out of the resources for now. It would be an underground scenario like historic production if it make it. Call me a basher if you like but I tend to look at actual data - rather than the pie in the sky speculation you do as a pumper.