GREY:LBEFF - Post by User
Comment by
hank2010on Jan 28, 2004 9:27pm
111 Views
Post# 6969265
RE: $8819 a ton (assayed)
RE: $8819 a ton (assayed)Real good comparison, Bob! You are causing me to take the blinkers off further! Comparing the narrow hi grade cobalt to what a calculated width of 2% nickel would be equivalent to makes it easier to understand. In the past I have heard mining analysts say "1 foot of X (high grade gold) oz/ton means nothing. You can not mine 1 foot wide!" And my standard answer has been if you can guarantee that the 1 foot of high grade is continuous, I will take it anyday compared to low grade over a wide width.
Maybe I needed some reminding?
If those holes at 100 metre spacing were in fact 8.75,17.0,10.81, and 10.0 metres of 2% nickel, I would be very confident that the infill holes would still have good grades over good widths (but WM would still have the property and would have already done a lot of drilling!). I am not as confident that the infill holes will still show good cobalt values over narrow widths. Nor am I as confident that the narrow hi-grade cobalt intersections will "line-up" with each other to maintain enough continuity to facillitate ore quantity calculations and eventual mining.
But if the in-fill drilling does show continuity--- $8819/ton! WOW!