stop kidding yourself, page-16

Well I see the PRW forum is still relatively lively with both supporters and haters.

Interesting that in a hole drilled for a base metals target the only element of note (ie. above background values) is silver (not unusual to see some in a base metals play I must say), and even that came from a part of the core that had no relation to the initial target.

As a geologist who makes his living out of exploration I can say that it is unusual to drill a hole, particularly a diamond hole, and sample the whole thing. Much of what is taken out of the ground is simply drilled so you can get to the bit you actually want to see. You also don't simply cut a few sections of a core, then assay them, and then go back to cut more core to have that assayed also. That means two lots of cutting / batch fees at the lab, and would in this case also be subject to minimum batch size penalties. This is just stupid, and no-one would do it unless they went back to the rest of the core for a reason.

What has happened here is that the initial target was cr@p, and so to save face other parts of the hole were sampled in an effort to gather some sort of positive news from the hole.

I'm with beany72 here - stop kidding yourself guys. The best way to make money out of PRW is sell your stock to some other sucker who knows less than you do.

Oh and for the technically minded - Basic and Mafic / Ultramafic cannot be interchanged - Basic is an outmoded term for rocks that are now grouped into the mafic field, while Mafic / Ultramafic refer to Iron, Magneisium and Silicon content of a rock.

JimmyZee, you might be a geo, but I'm suspecting that if you are then the sort of pointless arguing you have been engaged in marks you as maybe an undergraduate, or a fresh grad who hasn't yet learned that you do not in fact know everything simply because a university gave you a piece of paper with your name on it.

The issue here is not mafic / ultramafic / basic (well perhaps it is basic - ha ha). The issue is the simple matter of whether it is possible to have any confidence in a shambles of a company that either willfully, or perhaps worse mistakenly due to incompetence, misled the investing community so woefully.

Trading activities of the directors aside, PRW has a real credibility problem in my eyes, but whatever - I'm just a grumpy old cynic. DYOR.