@Noobtrader1 Hey Brother have to agree with brother David in that the assumptions now are becoming fairly complex to absorb.. If you want to get a handle on why then I can offer this research doc link (194 pages) which explains in full the difficulties in estimating continuity of grade and resource estimation in a similar style of system..
Basically it's trying to calculate via block modelling and various analysis methods (Kriging etc) what the final result will be because as the first 16 holes showed we had gold grades in every meter almost of between .005 and 56 g/t..over a factor of 3000m plus of drilling.
Based on a review of all downhole data and averaging all AU g/t grades recorded we arrive at a fully diluted av g/t of .475 g/t... and all but two recorded gold in meter 1
Hole ID From (m) To (m) Interval AU (g/t) 1 ZDDH0001 0 1 1 0.08 2 ZDDH0002 0 1 1 0.01 3 ZDDH0003 0 4 4 0.32 4 ZDDH0004 0 3 3 0.14 5 ZDDH0005 0 1 1 0.02 6 ZDDH0007 0 1 1 0.03 7 ZDDH0008 0 1 1 0.17 8 ZDDH0009 0 1 1 0.04 9 ZDDH0010 0 1.5 1.5 0.005 10 ZDDH0011 0 1 1 0.02 11 ZDDH0012 0 1 1 0.11 12 ZDDH0013 0 1 1 0.6 13 ZDDH0014 0 1.5 1.5 0.15 14 ZDDH0015 0 11.9 11.9 0 15 ZDDH0016 0 5.3 5.3 0
So you either apply that to a whole area to get an approximate feel and .475 it soon adds up when you extrapolate out over a few sqm as per the model put forward by the company.
Or you can split the two mineralised classifications and identify what is above cutoff (.2 g/t) and what sits below..
And over the full 16 holes the split between greater and less than .2 g/t looks like this.. 23.57% above and 76.43% below.. And this is where it gets interesting.
23.57% 76.43% 1 Interval (m) Interval (m) 2 3008 709 2299
Because even though grades below .2 g/t are considered uneconomical and therefore non reportable they are still held within the rock and still report to the leaching process and in fact over an area the size of the model shown below kick in 244,464 oz at a recovery rate of 98%.. The value of which is shown in both IG values and spot sale price values.. It aint chicken feed and is a nice little kick back towards production costs to balance that equation and make the whole thing fairly profitable..
1 Cutoff Length Width Av Depth SG av g/t RR % Ratio Resource Weight POG Sale E/Value ***** igV () Peer 0-150 iG E/Value SOI SP 2 0.2 g/t 750 600 260 2.5 1.92 0.98 23.57% 129,724,372 Grams 45 $203,556,998.86 488,000,000 $0.42 3 100 $452,348,886.35 488,000,000 $0.93 4 292,500,000 tonnes ore 129,724 Kilos 150 $678,523,329.53 488,000,000 $1.39 5 6 4,523,489 Ounces 1300 $5,880,535,523 7 1400 $6,332,884,409 8 1500 $6,785,233,295 9 1600 $7,237,582,182 10 1700 $7,689,931,068 11 1800 $8,142,279,954 12 13 <0.2 g/t 750 600 260 2.5 0.032 0.98 76.43% 7,010,727 Grams 14 15 292,500,000 tonnes ore 7,011 Kilos 16 17 244,464 Ounces 1300 $317,803,271 45 $11,000,882 488,000,000 $0.02 18 1400 $342,249,677 100 $24,446,405 488,000,000 $0.05 19 1500 $366,696,082 150 $36,669,608 488,000,000 $0.08 20 1600 $391,142,488 21 1700 $415,588,893
Av g/t for 16 holes using only values above .2 g/t was 1.92 g/t... For all metre values below (the majority in fact) the av g/t sat at .032 and yet it still delivers 7million grams of gold.
Now please bear in mind this is just an extrapolation exercise to show how even trace amounts of gold within the host lithology add up, but the continuity of grade inherent within IRGS systems indicates that any extrapolations shouldn't be too far off the mark..
For me it was just another exercise like we did at the beginning to try and determine fair value at present and therefore if you believe the math then my gut says at 32.5 we are undervalued by a reasonable measure and should see 42-44c at least based on the ***** in ground value multiply of $45..
And when Zeff says mineralised from surface I'd say it is true for the hole area as I doubt it was limited to just the first 16. Plus the area shown on the latest drill plot shows it isn't..
Area shown above was approx 750 x 100 x 192 av depth for first 16 holes
We are now at 5x that original drill hole multiple of 16 and cover a fairly big area mineralised from surface as indicated with the salmon hue.
Now I would love to think we are 850 x 800 x Av Depth 260+, as per the last announcement, but until we see the model I'm happy to just work off 750 x 600 x 260 av depth. for now. Plus it's showing a healthy figure to dream about as it is.. GLTAH 8tey
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- TSO
- ‘Massive’ gold intercept at El Zorro, shows project’s large-scale potential
‘Massive’ gold intercept at El Zorro, shows project’s large-scale potential, page-203
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 55 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add TSO (ASX) to my watchlist
(20min delay)
|
|||||
Last
3.3¢ |
Change
-0.002(5.71%) |
Mkt cap ! $40.57M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
3.6¢ | 3.6¢ | 3.3¢ | $15.03K | 430.2K |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 48530 | 3.3¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
3.5¢ | 20000 | 1 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
1 | 48530 | 0.033 |
1 | 596114 | 0.032 |
1 | 23890 | 0.030 |
1 | 200000 | 0.029 |
5 | 150000 | 0.028 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.035 | 20000 | 1 |
0.036 | 181818 | 1 |
0.037 | 125177 | 2 |
0.038 | 200000 | 2 |
0.039 | 150000 | 1 |
Last trade - 16.10pm 09/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
Featured News
TSO (ASX) Chart |