News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Dreamchaser

04/29/11 12:15 PM

#55559 RE: leifsmith #55558

All measurements between Pebble and the BCSP match, so, yes, drilling should match also. That's how I see it and I will not change my mind. A DNA test is nothing to scoff at.
icon url

king yukon

04/29/11 12:55 PM

#55565 RE: leifsmith #55558

That geotech.com stated that the 6/7 ZTEMs were of the same size and footprint. Also that they were LARGE COPPER PORIFFERIES the same as the nearby "PEBBLE". So those ZTEM would indicate the very composition of the discoveries below ground and their volumes.
icon url

amigo777

04/29/11 1:27 PM

#55572 RE: leifsmith #55558

Do you think that Cretaceous period caldera split "GOOD ORE" just in the Pebble area. Man..if you think that way then I am sorry, you might be going with truly a wrong perception here about LBSR's BCSP and the Caldera concept.

PLEASE USE LOGIC!
icon url

luckyjackaubrey

04/29/11 1:47 PM

#55580 RE: leifsmith #55558

Leif,

What does three cents tell you?

It tells me that either: few are aware, or that few are as of yet are convinced.
icon url

ValuePro

04/29/11 2:42 PM

#55596 RE: leifsmith #55558

I really don't post here anymore, but I do read some of the posts from time to time. Now please don't take this as a personal attack, but I do get irked with the numbers of posters here who repeatedly fail to recall the essence of Caldera Theory.

NOW HEAR THIS (Please)!

Caldera Theory, which is somewhat new but widely accepted by exploration geologists, states that where an economic deposit of minerals is found on a volcanic caldera, there a very likely to be found elsewhere on the caldera other deposits of similar size, grade, mix, and depth from surface

Now, commit the above to memory and note that ZTEM over Big Chuck pretty much confirms the theory. Absent drilling, this should convey a fairly high level of confidence in the project. And, in my opinion, be happy that you and few others are aware of this and very much ahead of the crowd who are very lacking in knowledge, and the guts to take advantage of it without "old school" drilling first bringing you the confidence to put your money at risk.

VP in AZ
[Still greatly miffed at the censorship here. Let's see how long it takes for this post to be taken down by some ignorant administrator who thinks it off topic.]
icon url

luckyjackaubrey

04/30/11 3:02 AM

#55655 RE: leifsmith #55558

"Does ZTEM tell us we have the same quantity, mix, and grade of ore?

Or does ZTEM tell us only that we have good readings and must drill to find out about quantity, mix, and grade?"

Number two. Drilling will ALWAYS be required in order to advance to production. It will also ALWAYS be required to generate the feasibility study, mine plan, analyze the metallurgy and etc.

In my OPINION, the value of ZTEM is that it MAY become recognized as adequate to attract risk capital BEFORE Drilling, and increase the speed an cost efficiency of drilling by more accurate placement and efficient
targeting of drill holes. It could significantly compress the timeline between having a deposit of vaguely understood characteristics and having a deposit that has been swiss-cheesed and is thoroughly understood.

It is a big leap from having a "Deposit" to getting people to sink money into it to get a good idea of what is actually there. ZTEM may be a means of eliminating or mitigating the Capital formation challenges that face a "Potential" project - and it may be happening as we speak, behind closed doors & etc.
icon url

luckyjackaubrey

04/30/11 3:16 AM

#55657 RE: leifsmith #55558

"Does ZTEM tell us we have the same quantity, mix, and grade of ore?

Or does ZTEM tell us only that we have good readings and must drill to find out about quantity, mix, and grade?"

Methinks Both!

It is a relatively new tool that will take time to be mastered and improved -it's likely that interpretation for grade, mix & etc, will be an evolutionary process based on experience and data accumulation. Drilling will ALWAYS be required in order to advance to production. It will ALWAYS be required to generate the feasibility study, mine plan, analyze the metallurgy and etc.

In my OPINION, the value of ZTEM is that it MAY become/be becoming recognized as adequate basis to attract risk capital BEFORE Drilling, and increase the speed and cost efficiency of drilling by more accurate targeting and efficient spacing
of drill holes. It could significantly compress the timeline between having a deposit of vaguely understood characteristics and having a deposit that has been swiss-cheesed and is thoroughly understood.

It is a big leap from having a "Deposit" to getting people to sink money into it to get a good idea of what is actually there. ZTEM may be a means of eliminating or mitigating the Capital formation challenges that face a "Potential" project - and it may be happening as we speak, behind closed doors & etc.

To the extent that my opinion isn't unfounded, the bottom line is that the timeline for share price appreciation (assuming a viable deposit) could also be compressed significantly.

An interesting speculation revolves around the question of where NAK would be today if they had ZTEM and a nearby "control sample' from the outset?