InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 183
Posts 41431
Boards Moderated 6
Alias Born 03/21/2012

Re: None

Sunday, 07/16/2017 3:48:19 AM

Sunday, July 16, 2017 3:48:19 AM

Post# of 47645
Correction. There are boneheads after all. Mexus!

Now that I have the Argo assay data in front of me, if you average the assays from the "high" grade intervals that Mexus lists for the Argo drilling, you get an average of.....wait for it....0.392 g/ton Au! That number does not apply to the entire 1,990 meters of drilling - just the best, highest grade intervals which were few and far between. So, the boneheads at Mexus flat-out lied in their PR when they made this statement:

The average for the 16 holes was .392 Au ppm



But wait, it gets better! No professional in the mining business would ever present an average of assays from intervals that varied in thickness. The "high grade intervals" range in thickness from 1.52 meters to 12.16 meters (basically 5 feet to 40 feet). Any first year mine engineering student knows that you need to consider weighted averages, since the "value" of a 1.52 meter thickness is not the same as a 12.16 meter thickness.

Highly misleading to manipulate data that way? Or simply ignorance? The ironic thing is that if they had done it using weighted averaging methods, the average assay for the high grade intervals might actually have been higher. Regardless, I think we can put to rest this issue about the assays, and maybe the company can issue a correction?

BTW, thanks go to the helpful fellow with an elephant's memory that pointed the way to the 8-K with the assays and drill map. I thought it might be in filings, and it was.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355677/000138730815000156/0001387308-15-000156-index.htm