RE:Comparativegeezer21 wrote: Both Newfound Gold and Sokoman Minerals have been finding high grade gold at shallow depth in Newfoundland. For comparison are the drill intercepts from Newfound Gold and Sokoman Minerals. Which is which is not identified just to illustrate that both companies are equally delineating significant gold deposits. Labrador on the same trend as Newfound Gold has been showing significant drill results also.
| A | | | B | |
| Interval* (m) | g/t | | Interval* (m) | g/t |
| 19 | 92.9 | | 2.3 | 79.23 |
| 7.9 | 24.1 | | 24.9 | 33.56 |
| 18.9 | 31.2 | | 11.8 | 6.61 |
| 18.4 | 15.8 | | 9.05 | 70.29 |
| 41.4 | 22.3 | | 44.96 | 11.9 |
| 6.9 | 44.5 | | 4.2 | 8.95 |
| 4.1 | 40.1 | | 4.6 | 47.2 |
| 16.9 | 25 | | 8.1 | 68.25 |
| 6.1 | 10.3 | | 3.5 | 12.39 |
| 13.1 | 45.3 | | 3.05 | 16.54 |
| 2.4 | 29.3 | | 6.7 | 3.25 |
| 10.3 | 25 | | 5.1 | 15.51 |
| 5.8 | 19.8 | | 4.1 | 1.52 |
| 7.3 | 19.3 | | 42 | 64 |
| 10.4 | 22.5 | | 1.5 | 6.18 |
| 15.9 | 31.4 | | 11.6 | 21.07 |
| 18.2 | 10 | | 3 | 1.82 |
| 13.8 | 28.4 | | 5 | 26.87 |
| 3.3 | 20.6 | | 3 | 1.61 |
| 2 | 17.1 | | 20.95 | 5.15 |
| 2.9 | 13.7 | | 1.8 | 11.85 |
| 2.1 | 136.7 | | 5.4 | 2.76 |
| 14.1 | 31.5 | | 10.4 | 3.09 |
| 5.6 | 13.7 | | 3.6 | 10.4 |
| 32.3 | 6.2 | | 4 | 24.92 |
| 4.7 | 131.1 | | 22.1 | 1.65 |
| 17.7 | 124.4 | | 3.5 | 11.95 |
| 4.1 | 45.6 | | 9.5 | 5.7 |
| 7.9 | 22.7 | | 5.2 | 16.85 |
| 39.1 | 25.8 | | 1.6 | 30.97 |
| 2.3 | 41.6 | | 4.1 | 21.6 |
| 3 | 49.4 | | 7.2 | 22.35 |
| 4.7 | 27.8 | | 6.4 | 17.34 |
| 3.9 | 24.5 | | 3 | 7.85 |
| 6.5 | 37.1 | | 9.8 | 6.65 |
| 8.5 | 17.9 | | 4.6 | 1.21 |
| 3.5 | 19.3 | | 1.55 | 5.23 |
| 11.4 | 29.1 | | 4.6 | 1.21 |
| 2 | 41.8 | | 1.55 | 5.23 |
| 13.7 | 61.8 | | 4.95 | 27.7 |
| 7 | 15.6 | | 1 | 54.63 |
| 9.2 | 106.5 | | 4.8 | 17.56 |
| 7.2 | 261.3 | | 9.2 | 6.7 |
| 2.5 | 16.9 | | 2.35 | 20.39 |
| 8.4 | 63.7 | | 5.1 | 7.64 |
| 25.6 | 146.2 | | 2.35 | 20.39 |
| 8.1 | 21.4 | | 5.1 | 7.64 |
| 12.9 | 14.9 | | 4.25 | 2.58 |
| | | | 2.28 | 13.67 |
| | | | 2.4 | 0.75 |
| | | | 5.2 | 7.68 |
| | | | 3.7 | 9.1 |
| | | | 0.8 | 41.01 |
| | | | 6 | 6.47 |
| | | | 2.2 | 4.35 |
| | | | 3.6 | 21.86 |
| | | | 2.55 | 22.45 |
| | | | 1.7 | 2.73 |
| | | | 3.1 | 8.6 |
| | | | 1.1 | 4.72 |
| | | | 1.2 | 2.94 |
| | | | 2 | 1.82 |
| | | | 18.9 | 13.09 |
| | | | 1.4 | 60.94 |
| | | | 2.65 | 1.85 |
| | | | 0.5 | 22.72 |
| | | | 0.45 | 278 |
| | | | 17.11 | 11.05 |
| | | | 2.65 | 1.85 |
| | | | 0.5 | 22.72 |
| | | | 0.45 | 278 |
| | | | 17.11 | 11.05 |
| | | | 1.53 | 170.31 |
| | | | 16.84 | 14.07 |
Geezer,
I recognize the drill results. Column A is NFG and Column B is SIC. I am an early investor in SIC going back to 2018 and have had a sizeable position and built a good position in NFG the past several months. So I am not biased in saying that SIC does not have the monster hits that NFG has had. NFG has had several very wide intersections and grades per tonne at crazy levels. They also have multiple sites on a massive property. SIC has had fantastic results yes. However do you really believe the market is that dumb at this point with NFG valuation at about $1.3Billion and SIC at $70M? Markets are imperfect but lets not be realistic. Again, I love both companies.
I am not sure what the purpose is of even doing these comparisons?
BC