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

Providence Gold Mines Inc V.PHD

Alternate Symbol(s):  PRRVF

Providence Gold Mines Inc. is a Canada-based mineral exploration company. The Company is engaged in the process of exploring and evaluating its mineral property located in California, United States. It owns 100% interest in Tuolumne Property. The Company’s gold mines consist of seven patented stake mineral claims and 22 located claims, encompassing an area of approximately 324 acres, which includes Bonita, Consuelo, FairPlay, Good Enough, McCarthy, Mexican, and Providence. The Providence Group of Mines is located in the Summerville Mining District, Tuolumne County, California, upon the eastern belt of the Mother Lode District. Its subsidiary is Providence Gold Mines (US) Inc.


TSXV:PHD - Post by User

Comment by KozmoTon Nov 26, 2021 11:11am
41 Views
Post# 34168970

RE:RE:Accuracy of a bulk sample - is actually the point

RE:RE:Accuracy of a bulk sample - is actually the pointIts like getting stopped for doing 150 km/hr in a 30 km/hr zone and telling the officer, "But I was only driving for 10 minutes."  When all your assays are between 0.1 g/t and 1.0 g/t and suddenly you get one thats 100 g/t it should be obvious to most people that the problem is the assay or a nugget and you either re-assay the sample (which they did NOT) or you chuck it.  You don't include 3 samples over 60 g/t with 146 samples averaging around 0.5 g/t ... FOR THE OBVIOUS REASONS.

And that folks is why Gamble will NOT give you the grade number he came up with when he went with the 146 assay numbers leaving out the three obvious nugget effect numbers.

If you were a mining executive with a reputable exploration company and you reported that ... you'd be fired.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>