Aurelian Resources Was Stolen By Kinross and Management But Will Not Be Forgotten
The company whose shareholders were better than its management
Message: 43-101 & Insitu Valuations
I can understand how an investor, who has no real experience in mining and whom must rely soley on definitions provided by CIM, could not understand how it would be possible for ARU to receive simular insitu gold valuations as that of meridain.
Rather than me trying to convay 20 years of mining experience in one post, justify why ARU should receive a 300+ insitu gold price on any serious takeover.Which would be a waste of my time because it would be highly technical and most of the readers here would not understand a fraction of what I am talking about.
I will instead, draw attention to the variuos 43-101 definitions of catagories in the defining of what a resource and a reserve is.
43-101 was brought into effect after the BreX scandal, in order to bring some regulation to companies in the reporting of there mineral reserves. It more importantly made that qualified person reporting such estimates, accountable for there accuracy.
If you will note, from the definitions, so thoughtfully supplied by a fellow poster that there is a lot of leeway given to the qualified reporting person in the first 3 catagories of resource.
The real distinction comes when claiming resource estimates as actual reserves in the proven or probable catagory. This is because a feasability study must be conducted first in order to claim such.
In effect, it depends greatly on the reporting geologists opinion and his relevant experience, whether or not the mineral deposit that a company has discover is placed in the Inferred, Indicated or Measured catagories of resource.
What one geologist may classify from his experience in the Measured Resouce Catagory based on 10 DD holes, another geologist may classify only in the Inferred catagory and feel you need 100 DD holes to justify Measured Resource status.
Unfortunately for us there is no accountability for ever being too concervative in one estimates hahahahahaha.
Taking the information that we have however from ARU's latest press release and the CIM definitions. Lets determine for ourselves what actual catagory ARU's ounces could be placed in. I have placed in bold the significant wording in each catagory.
Inferred Mineral Resource that part of a mineral resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on the basis of geological evidence and limited sampling and reasonably assumed, but not verified, geological and grade continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling from locations such as out crops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes. Due to the uncertainty that may be attached to inferred Mineral resources, it cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will be upgraded to an indicated or measured resource as a result of continued exploration.
Comparing the above CIM definition with statement made in the latest ARU press release we seem to have a misunderstanding in how to evaluate the mineral stages of a project.
For instance, these statement in the latest ARU press release
(“The new drill results confirm the continuity of geology and grade in the central part of FDN,” said Patrick F.N. Anderson, President and CEO. “ Our consultants have also advised us that they do not anticipate the currently completed drilling will result in a significant material change in the tonnage or grade of the mineral resources at the deposit." ) seem in my opinion, when compared to the above Infererred definition, to argue strongly for an increase in catagory.
Indicated Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough for geological and grade continuity to be reasonably assumed. Mineralization may be classified as an Indicated Mineral Resource by the Qualified Person when the nature, quality, quantity and distribution of data are such as to allow confident interpretation of the geological framework and to reasonably assume the continuity of mineralization.
It would seem in my opinion from the the above statements in the ARU press release that the portion of FDN's deposit drilled on a 50mX50m pattern. Should at least be included as an Indicated Resource. Lets further continue.
Measured Mineral Resource is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are so well established that they can be estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support production planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough to confirm both geological and grade continuity. Mineralization or other natural material of economic interest may be classified as a Measured Mineral Resource by the Qualified Person when the nature, quality, quantity and distribution of data are such that the tonnage and grade of the mineralization can be estimated to within close limits and that variation from the estimate would not significantly affect potential economic viability. This category requires a high level of confidence in, and understanding of, the geology and controls of the mineral deposit.
Once again from the above statements made in the ARU press release including the following ("Inspection of drill cross sections allow the width of the mineralized envelope to be estimated visually.", "A review and comparison of the final QA/QC-approved intersections from the new 50m spaced drilling against the previous mineralized domain model has shown few surprises. It is anticipated that the new data will result in only modest changes to the mineralized envelope used to control the grade interpolation. It is not anticipated that the currently completed drilling will result in a significant material change in the tonnage or grade of the mineral resources at the deposit.”.
One could argue very strongly that in fact the portion of ARU drilled on a 50x50 m pattern could easily be included in the Measured Resource catagory.
In fact, one has to wonder why it has not been , since ARU used to have on its Web site initial Long hole production plan layouts and plans on mine developement. Which for some mysterious reason have been taken down hahahahahahaha.
Making up such plans, in conjuction with metalurgical recovery testing and drilling geotechnical holes for mine planning, along with hiring firms to do mine planning, would actually, only be warranted according to my interpretation of CIM definitions. If a company actually assumed that there was a high likely hood that a portion of there Inferred resource would be upgraded into the Indicated and Measured catagory's.
This goes directly against the CIM definition of an Inferred resource that states " it cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will be upgraded to an indicated or measured resource as a result of continued exploration. "
Perhaps, our management likes to waste shareholder capital, hiring consultants to do testing that according to CIM definitions and how they are classifying our deposit, can not be sure is warranted hahahahahahahaha.
Proven Mineral Reserve is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This Study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified. Application of the Proven Mineral Reserve category implies that the Qualified Person has the highest degree of confidence in the estimate with the consequent expectation in the minds of the readers of the report. The term should be restricted to that part of the deposit where production planning is taking place and for which any variation in the estimate would not significantly affect potential economic viability. The CIM Definition Standards provide for a direct relationship between Indicated Mineral Resources and Probable Mineral Reserves and between Measured Mineral Resources and Proven Mineral Reserves. In other words, the level of geoscientific confidence for Probable Mineral Reserves is the same as that required for the in situ determination of Indicated Mineral Resources and for Proven Mineral Reserves is the same as that required for the in situ determination of Measured Mineral Resources.
Now, while we do not have all the imformation gathered, as far as I know, and according to CIM definitions, to classify the drilled of portion of FDN in one of the Reserve catagories. It can be argued, that from ARU's past news releases and former Web site material, that they were putting together the required information, such as mining, processing, and metalurical processes required for a preliminary feasibilty study.
In my opinion, looking at lengths of core that are world class not only in grade but also shear size.
The process of doing a feasibility study will not be to question if FDN will be profitable to mine, it will be done in order to determine just how hugely profitable it will be.
In conclusion, I just have to wonder why our management is being so concervative in its resource estimation catagory. Especially when there on the record comments and actions in my mind seem to contradict CIM definitions.
A suspicious mind, might start coming up with all kinds of conspiracy scenario's hahahahahahaha.
With the amount of work ARU has done and the quality of FDN deposit. In my opinion, the FDN deposit, not only warrants an in-situ valuation equal too but greater than that received by Meridian's.
Any other opinion on this in my view display's the posters lack of real mining knowledge.
Regards,
F.F.
19 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply