Providence Gold Mines Inc V.PHD

Near as I can find

[martindale]

The weight of that 1 stockpile, which is 25,000 cubic meters is just over a ton a cubic meter. 27,000 tons. Look it up yourself, we have 6 such known piles.. total weight I cant say but, CEO estimates 200,000 tons of stuff.prove him wrong...at 3.5 grams of gold I’m using $1700 per oz.  (being conservative) per ton ( would be $38 million or 22,500 ish oz) and again just to be conservative we will use a tonage of 140,000 we arrive at about 16,000 oz of gold worth about $28 million.the one stock pile alone at 25,000 cubic meters with 3.5 grams per ton is in the range of $5.2 million, that’s not to say overall grades could be higher or lower, we have a recovery of 61%-70ish %, and that’s without using any chemicals for gold recovery.. so take that Into account as well, I’m not doing all the math for you..  GLTA Invested! Again I am only estimating based on what I can glean from company documents and is lower that I thought I had seen in the presentation, all the same it is still a healthy chunk of cash that only needs to be scooped up...Drilling to follow and more gold to be found..

[KozmoT]

Lets try that again but with realistic numbers ... I'll give you the 27,000 tonnes.  The average grade comes in around 0.5 g/t once you cap the obvious nugget effect samples but lets say its double that at 1 g/t.  The recovery rates from the bulk sample sucked but lets pretend almost all of the waste is NOT Low Grade and go with the Medium Grade composite recovery of 67% 27,000 x 1

[KozmoT]

* correction *  I gave gold recovery as 67% and just realized its only 61% for the Medium Grade composite - they "forgot" to disclose the recovery rate for a Low Grade composite which is odd given almost all the waste pile was Low Grade.

[2021Gamble]

As I have said before Kozmo....you make whatever "assumptions" you want. But at least be kind enough to let people know how many samples you are discarding....and why You may not like my numbers because they include all the samples - that is your prerogative However, this is a man made pile of crushed waste, not a normal sample from a GEO wandering the property and stumbles upon a

[Goldy63]

Thats what bashers do Gamble lmao . Check your messages bro . TGIF. Long PHD. 

[KozmoT]

I'm not the one making the wild assumptions Gamble - that's you when you assume an obvious nugget effect in 3 of 109 1 to 3 kg samples samples can be included to reflect the grade of the 27,000 tonne waste pile as a whole.   Tell us what the grade of the pile would be if that one single 300+ g/t hole had been drilled just 1 foot to the side?  You can't or won't

[2021Gamble]

Yup...multiple high grade samples....from the 109 drilling and the 149 trenching samples From both trenching and drilling, 258 samples Yup...multiple high grade samples as you are very much aware From this man-made stockpile...proving that the stockpile contains gold, and not just gold, but significant mutlitiple high assays, raise the probability that there is more Do you remember your high

[givemeabreak1]

Gamble stop talking stupid! When do a resource calculation it is done as a block model.  So each individual block is calculated separately as the specific gravity and various other issues can be calculated separately.  The reason why you cap the grades becomes apparent when you do this.  Needless to say it is a stockpile so likely the same or close to the same specific gravity and

[2021Gamble]

blah blah blah blah you obvioulsy haven't even looked at where the gold was discovered in the trenching or the drilling of the stockpile @givemeabreak  - you continue to talk about "blocks" as if this is a normal resource they are profiling , or that the trenching or drilling was done "in blocks" Do you even know that 10 of the drill holes were done outside of the

[KozmoT]

Why don't you redo your calcs without that ONE SINGLE highest nugget effect assay and get back to us? I guarantee you will not do this ... for the obvious reason.

[Goldy63]

Humm. Would you not need to calculate all samples  then do your average so your number is accurate  ?. Yup . Have a good day Kramer . Cheers . Long PHD.

[2021Gamble]

I did that for you already @kozmoT....I did calculate it without that single high grade sample.  And your response was a request for me to go back to 109 drill samples instead of using 258-1....(the drilling and trenching combined) and you didn't like the number because it was too high... so the you said, eliminate the top 3... then you said, eliminate the top 10... you make whatever

[Goldy63]

Nice work Gamble . Appreciated . When you suck sour lemons all day like Kozmo Kramer well he don't want beauty numbers and the crumblord is sitting on the bids working weak hands. Obvious . Cheers . Long PHD.