brm, page-47

Hi haematite,

I think that either:
- People have misinterpretd the beneficiation process BRM will use
- The beneficiation process is not good enough as many suspect.

Here is a company quote, which I is the reason I asked you the first question:

"The company advises that the results of initial screen upgrade testwork on sonic core samples from the North-West Sector mineralisation has demonstrated the potential to upgrade low-grade detrital mineralisation into a marketable product."

"Al2O3 grades were reduced by 25 – 40% for pisolited etritals and by 28 – 38% for mixed detritals.
SiO2 grades were reduced by 55 – 70% for pisolite detritals and by 25 - 45% for mixed detritals."

Detrital Update - 11th Dec

We do know original Detrital impurities are:
Silica - 25%
Alumina - 6%
(both off the scale in my books).

Assuming the maximum beneficiation, this brings them down to:
Silica - 7.5%
Alumina - 3.6%

Even these are still on the high side. Silica should be 3-5%, Alumina 1-2%. (note: this is why UMC Railway ore is so significant - many punters have still not realised the importance of the low impurities that UMC have).

However - they say that their DSO ore has 4% Alumina!!!

I think they are still working on their mechanical beneficiation process. How were they able to come out with a statement like:
"potential to upgrade low-grade detrital mineralisation into a marketable product".

I can't believe that Wayne Richards would jeopardise his reputation by feeding the market b.s. He hasn't sold any shares on market, so there must be some truth to it.

Anyhow -- I apologise to my fellow UMCers for this geological chat. If it is any consolation, I used part profits on BRM to purchase another 20,000 UMC earlier in the week.

Heamatite, please respond on this thread, or email joelbaby @ hotmail.com