Replies to post #114650 on KAT Exploration Inc (KATX)

[Wolverine302]

Dang it Geo, now the old man has no purpose to respond, thus cannot be exposed for not knowing that answer for the claim he makes of time spent in the field..

[Funaboard]

Hey this was for the guy with 60 years, but as long as you are here.

You brought up a interesting point. However it was not my question, If you were looking for RARE EARTH Element's and (Au, Ag, Pb, and Cu, or AU and base metals, etc) could it take longer? The PR's said something about REE's and this is why I'm asking.

Have you had experience with IOCG and REE's ?

[Biochemist2002]

I agree with your summary geo_newfie. Most likely the analytes are being analyzed simultaneously. ICPMS is a fantastic method for such a case. In fact, most labs will purchase custom-mix standards for calibration that already contain the analytes of interest. In addition, they will confirm every calibration curve with standards from secondary/independent sources to make sure the calibration standard was accurate. These are run as "check standards" every 10 samples or so, along with a blank to make sure there's no positive bias (false positives) or contamination. So, usually they don't need to recalibrate for other metals...assuming they're to be run by the same method. Now, they could be running some by ICPMS and some by AA (Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy), but again, most labs have individual analysts running these instruments at the same time, all day, 5-7 days per week. So there wouldn't necessarily be a delay. That being said, instrument problems occur all the time...and are not unusual either. At one time I could be running 5-10 different GCs or GCMSs, and on any given day 3 or so of them could be down, either for maintenance, quarterly/semi-annual or annual QC, etc. Sometimes the instrument is down and the manufacturer tells you it'll be a week or two before they can fly out a Service Engineer! In the mean time, all the lab can do is try to fix it in-house. These instruments are so precise, and the slightest "issue" could completely skew the data (which would be obvious because of all the check standards/blanks/duplicates/matrix spikes etc.). But, once the analyst plainly sees there's an issue, it's time to troubleshoot and see if you can find the problem. Is it a carrier gas issue, a problem with the separation column, a matrix issue? A good chemist will know how to interpret what they're seeing. Unfortunately, just because you correctly diagnose the issue, doesn't mean you can always fix it right away. Like I said, sometimes you have to order new parts (is there a backorder?), or the service contract requires the manufacturer's certified engineer to perform the maintenance (else the service contract is void).

In any event, I think we should be hearing the Rusty Ridge results very very soon, and I'm of the opinion that we will do well. A lot of exploration work has been conducted so far (geochemistry, IP, Magnetic and Gravity anomaly testing, etc.) So, it's not like we went into Rusty Ridge completely blind. Of course, the assays will have to tell us exactly what is below the surface. And for that, we will just have to wait and see. If I'm wrong, then at least I can say I made an "educated" speculation. Until then, I anxiously wait.