iHub Mining Sector Entrance Lobby

[amarksp]

echarters, I certainly agree...
"but yes, unless they are drilled, they do not know it."

FWIW, GBG has made no formal or informal press release saying they have found a N-S vein at Ivanhoe or even that such a vein system may exist. I am very surprised GBG management would make this statement at their AGM..., I sure was not expecting such a statement to be made, but if Jackc says they made it, then they did... No such statement has ever been made in a press release.

My understanding is GBG has reevaluated their drill holes at Ivanhoe and have held discussions with geologists from Ken Snyder and other nearby mines, and as a result of this review, believe there is a likelihood of a N-S vein system. The only Ivanhoe reserves I am counting on are the 1M ounces already identified, anything else is gravy... But you are correct, unless they drill it, they do not know, and thus GBG should not have made such a statement at the AGM, IMO.

Also, the SouthGold/Burnstone shares can be increased if more gold reserves are discovered in excess of those identified. However, it is my understanding (phone call this week) that the SouthGold/Burnstone shares can NOT be decreased if substantially more gold reserves are identified at Ivanhoe. Thus, if GBG "KNOWS" that the N-S vein system exists at Ivanhoe, then why would they not have a clause to decrease the SouthGold share issuance upon a large reserve increase at Ivanhoe... For that matter, if they KNOW, then why do a substantial share issuance for Burnstone at all... Guess a similar/offsetting increase to reserves could be found at Burnstone, but if they KNOW, then why do the Burnstone transaction at all...

FWIW, I spoke to IR around June 19th about a possible N-S vein structure (based upon drilling incline from USX East pit) and they did NOT advise me that they knew it was there..., thus again am surprised that they would know it was there at the AGM meeting date...

Nonetheless, it does appear to me that the incline from the USX East pit (scheduled to begin in 4Q03) does in fact parallel a suspected N-S vein structure (especially if it goes a bit further north). I am not entirely confident of this (they took away certain drill hole maps from their website and replaced them with broad vein maps w/o drill hole numbers), but this does appear to be the case. In any event, as stated, the only reserves at Ivanhoe I really expect (and what is expected by investors given the current GBG share price) are only the 1M ounces already identified plus maybe 20% more likely to be identified when the incline drilling/testing is finished.

In regard to your comments:
"By SEC rules he CANNOT say that mineralization on other claims infers mineralization on his own... What the 43-101 is saying is that if I get a room full of people and talk about raising syndicate money for a claim group, I HAVE to have 43-101 opinion to talk"

Am not sure what rules govern what can be said and not said at a AGM, there was no press release regarding these AGM comments. Further, GBG has no plans whatsoever to issue more shares or a PP for the rest of this year at a minimum so your raising syndicate money comments may be moot since they have no intention of raising money anytime soon, IMO.

In conclusion, let me reiterate that I am very surprised GBG management would make this statement on a N-S vein at their AGM... I am at a complete loss figuring out how to explain such comments...

Jackc, could you e-mail me at [e-mail] using GBG as a subject heading so my e-mail program does not delete your message...