Easy - just remove any misleading statements from your presentation.
We're going to look at AZ's presentations on the Taylor deposit from the 7th December (link) and the 22nd December (link).
- Great concentrate comments - gone (it makes for a less cluttered slide)
- we now have different recoveries for Zinc and Silver
Slide 3 - original
Slide 3 - new and improved presentation
 |
| they still have the highly experienced management team |
Slide 6 - original
Slide 14 - new and improved
 |
| oh no, the concentrate isn't clean anymore! |
So in 2 week the recoveries have changed from:
Zinc Concentrate
- Zn - original = 87%, new and improved = 85.5% - a 1.5% difference
- Ag - 8-15% original, average ~12%, new and improved = 15%, a 3% difference
Lead Concentrate
- Pb - original 93%; new and improved = 92.9% recovery, no real difference
- Ag - 76-85% recovery of silver, average ~80%; new and improved = 76%, a 4% difference
That is impressive, in 2 weeks with no additional testing AZ have managed to decrease recoveries of Zinc and Silver. Were the values in the earlier presentation wrong?
Another tour-de-force with AZ.
ReplyDeleteJunior mining is riddled through with scamsters and piss-artistes. I salute you for wading into the mudpile.
You are doing God's work. Or at very least the Globe's work. (Northern Miner? do they even have an "investigative" mandate or do they just carry corporate water?)
Stay Angry!
Thank you Soiled,
DeleteI have to admit it is quite a lot of fun! A lot of the issues at Taylor have resulted from a 'lack of knowledge' from the management. They are all exploration geologists, as am I, and one thing that is lacking in my knowledge is potential issues that would impact mining and metal recoveries. We have an attitude in exploration of finding a deposit and just passing it on without thinking if there was anything else we could do with the data we collect to identify potential problems as early as possible.
In this case, these are self inflicted injuries, and rather than management of AZ approaching it head on and admit that they were not away of the issues with Mn in Zn concs and done a review of their database to see if the Mn was actually a problem or only really an issue close to the Manto Oxide zone.
DeleteSimply put - if they had been proactive (rather than reactive), they could have minimized the impact from the GMO article. Instead they appear to be 'removing the evidence' buy 'updating' their presentation to include potentially libelous statements.
If I was a shareholder, I'll be having a few blunt conversations with AZ
Never quite understood why GMO retracted his article, he could just follow up with that next one. Maybe a lawsuit was coming
ReplyDeleteHe may have been protecting his sources?
DeleteThanks A.G, good work
ReplyDeleteShoot, I also noticed that the grade of the concentrate has decreased!
ReplyDelete