Re: Just talked to Richard Nemis

HIGH-GRADE NI-CU-PT-PD-ZN-CR-AU-V-TI DISCOVERIES IN THE "RING OF FIRE"

NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

chrism

Rank: President [?]

Points: 8381 [?]

Votes: 105 Score: 3.7 [?]

Your Vote:

Please Log In to Vote

Did you know? You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)

Re: Just talked to Richard Nemis

in response to

Just talked to Richard Nemis

glorieux

posted on Mar 26, 2008 01:18PM

Thank you Glorieux, this is indeed great news!

On a similar note, I was taken aback upon reading the following verbatum in Hawk's NR today: "...which has a very similar geophysical signature to Noront's "known showings" in the area."

If one were semantically inclined, one could postalize that since DE1 and DE2 are NOT mentioned in the NR, that "known showings" need not be inclusive of just DE1 and DE2, and that "known showings" could include more than just DE1 and DE2.

As I am not semantically inclined, I don't mind being forthright in saying that If "known showings" is only representative of DE1 and DE2, wouldn't it have been easier to just say DE1 and DE2?

Is it just me, or is it as though the NR wording has been finecombed by a lawyer of sorts? He is a remarkable man.

11 Recommendations

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

Please to post a reply