Mining Company research board

[gitreal]

From a Nov. 8, 2023 PR by Sydney Resources (SDRC): https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SDRC/news/Sidney-Resources-Corporation-Reports-Assay-Results-and-a-Comprehensive-Evaluation-of-Recently-Discovered-Gold-Enriched-S?id=420598

An additional 50-pound bulk sample was processed down to a 29-gram concentrate and analyzed, yielding a gold grade of 117 oz/ton Au. This equates to an approximate bulk grade of 2.925 oz/ton.

I got curious about the math they used to come up with a bulk grade of nearly 3 oz/ton for their 20,000 ton stockpile of ore they found in the woods. That seemed too good to be true. They took a 50 pound bulk sample (which is an inadequate number of samples to characterize a 20,000 ton pile of rock, by the way), and they "concentrated" it down to a one ounce sample for assay. Not sure how they "concentrated" it, but regardless, they took 800 ounces and ended up with one ounce of concentrates. Then assayed the concentrate and got a result of 117 oz/ton gold. And back-calculated the bulk grade to be 2.925 oz/ton (it looks like they assumed because they started with a 50 pound sample, 40 times that equals one ton, so divide 117 oz/ton by 40). My logic is that if you concentrate it down from 800 ounces down to one ounce, you have to divide your assay result by 800 (not 40). So, the bulk grade should be 0.14625 oz/ton. Still pretty amazing grade for a placer material but again, one bulk sample is pretty shaky.

Am I missing something here?

If they had split the sample repeatedly to get a one ounce sample, and not concentrated it.....the bulk assay would be the assay they got, 117 oz/ton, no additional math needed.

And then, here's the best part....they used their calculated bulk grade to determine the value of the stockpile, minus processing costs. An amazing $109 million in profit, they simply multiplied the P/E by 8, and voila.......resulted in a share price of $1.81!! All because they stumbled on an old ore pile in the woods that everyone else has overlooked.