Cooky, I just noticed on Yahoo MB that you are still unclear on this weeks' assays. I'm happy to try to clear your confusion and perhaps others here that read both boards, so I hope this helps.

You stated on Yahoo that my estimation on average gold and antimony assays based on the last news release are in error for not mentioning the "missing" assays, that to you, account for 35% of the assays. You say that I "selected only 65% of the results, forgetting that there were other results pending."

Your post on Yahoo was made hours after I attempted to correct your error in that the "missing" assays are in fact from Workman's Bench and that these outstanding (to be released) assays have nothing to do with the 24 assay results from Pringle on which I based my estimation. Apparently, I was not clear.

Again, my estimation was in fact based on 100% of the results, that is, 24 assays at 24 separate PB locations.

Hope this helps your confusion.

____________________

Your post on Yahoo, Oct 27th at 6:17 pm:

....His calculation today is wrong because he selected only 65% of the results, forgetting that there were other results pending. He didn't let the reader know his bias either, which if he had the reader could then decide based on his partial analysis. His other choice was to use zero oz & lbs, and amend once the company releases the data.