Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Dark Star - Redux

This is just a quick update, I made the last post a bit too technical, and here is a simplified version.

Drill-holes 16-03B shows the zone of good (>1 g/t) gold mineralization has been extended by another 100m to the south of drill-hole 16-08. This zone is now 350m long.

Unfortunately, drill-hole 16-01 may suggest that the gold zone at North Dark Star is very narrow, maybe only 100m wide. This is not good,

Originally I thought that at North Dark Star there is a high grade core grading >1 g/t Au (this is a good open pit grade), and the gold grades gradually decreasing as you move to the south and west. This is similar to what you see at the main Dark Star and Pinion deposits.
Red = high grade; yellow = low grade. Blue = Dark Star Fault
My back of the envelope guesstimate was that we had a gold zone that was:
  • 400m long, 250m wide by 150m vertically.
  • I used a specific gravity of 2.8 tonnes/m
  • 42 Mt @ ~0.75 g/t Au or just over 1M oz Au - this is similar to the other deposits scattered around the project

But, drill-hole 16-01 seems to show this:
red = high grade; yellow = low grade
A very small high grade zone, with a small low grade halo. This reduces my guesstimate potential to be:
  • 350m x 150m x 100m using an SG of 2.8 = 14.7Mt @ 0.75 g/t Au
  • or a potential for ~350,000 oz Au - a 65% reduction. 

So in summary, if hole 16-01 is correct, North Dark Star is very small, and we are getting a repeat of what has happened at the other deposits GSV has drilled - a few good holes and then nothing. Let;s move on the the next target...

They see to have done this time and time again - at North Bullion, Pinion, Central etc etc.

How have they managed to be so lucky and get such great drill-holes from what have turned out to be some very average deposits?

Let us look at their proposed holes for the Main Dark start deposit - drill-holes DS16-17, -18 and 20.

Proposed drill-holes - main Dark Star deposit.
All three are planned to be drilled into the highest grade part of the already defined gold mineralization within the deposit. It guarantees some great assays but all they are doing is duplicating the historic drilling, and when they do a new resource calculation, you'll probably find (unless SRK are involved) that not much will have changed.

A nice little example of Promo exploration.


  1. Thank you Sir, Much more understandable to investors like myself lacking in your technical expertise.

    You have a wonderful website and perform a much needed public service. Your efforts are most appreciated and I wish you the greatest of success.

    1. Thank you. I appreciate the feed back to make sue that I keep everything as understandable as possible.

  2. Any thoughts on OOO.V results at Crab Claw?

  3. http://www.otisgold.com/news/2016/index.php?&content_id=157

  4. Kudos for 'dumbing it down' I consider myself a greyhair and even so sometimes the high grade pooh went over MY head.

    Reality is the vast majority of folks rely on what they're told by worthless professional crooked basterds. Your efforts exposing those shenanigans are invaluable.

    I do wish folks would realize that 'doing requests' (for dead free anyway) is an imposition. If AG does one there will be a zillion more with the same (free) expectations in .03 seconds. If folks REALLY want their deal examined by the AG try offering some folding loot for the effort ... it may help.

    1. If you want to help, I would suggest a donation to a local charity. There are people out there that really need help. I'm just a geo playing with data.

  5. For the record I have gone one step better than Turdly MT at Inca Kola on this ORE.v disgrace. I present Oy Leuangthong - SRK, and Glen Cole - SRK. Somehow methinks these two won't be on AG's X-Mas card list this year. These two are, well, Pfffft. http://pennystockjournal.blogspot.ca/2016/08/orezone-gold-corporation-orev.html

    1. I wonder what will happen with SRK's report on Dalradian?

  6. TAG, Thanks again for the N Dark Star commentary. By coincidence I was trying to pull together a resource today as well. Problem I am having is including the 2015 drilling w/ this '16 phase. I cant find any maps w/ all the holes (the pre-GSV holes can be found sort of in the 43-101). Have you been able to combine all the drilling here?
    Also, IMO the SG will likely be closer to 2.35 given this seems to be so weathered/oxidized karst/sediment, at least judging from the core photos.

    1. Hello Brent,

      ping me an e-mail (theangrygeologist@gmail.com) and I'll send you my working files - they are basically excel files and some georeferenced maps. If you use Leapfrog gue - i'll upload the entire project.

      I found that a lot of the collar info was in the various press releases and the 2016 technical report - I just extracted the pages in Acrobat and saved it as a spreadsheet. For the dips, azimuths and hole depths, I had to get that from each PR. The Dips were the hardest as you can see the hole traces on the plan map that accompanies each PR, but you can see obvious deviation (e.g. holes with a reported Az of 090 but on the map they are closer to 100 etc.).

    2. regarding the SG - 2.8 is my default, in the technical report they use 2.58 (I was being a bit lazy).

    3. here is a link to my DH DB for dark star
      if you want the entire project, send me an e-mail and I'll send it to you

  7. I think,judging from their past,the next steps management will take are:
    1. Give few more great holes.
    2. Flood of promotion.
    3. Do a Equity Raise
    4. Talk about M&A
    5. Move on to a new location, and repeat the process again and again.

    Hopefully, investor will see the game the management is playing. If they were serious, they would be thinking of developing Pinon. they bought Pinon and claimed to have more than 1 million oz resources and other great stuff. so, why not just develop it. Nope, they are happier going on loop with drill and drill.

    1. Maybe a company to buy in the dips (i.e. today!!). Unfortunately I don;t thin that even all of the combined resources are quite good enough to develop. They are all a bit to small and low grade. Potentially there is an opportunity to have a centralized mill and mine the deposits separately but they are quite spread out and transport costs could scupper this.

      I'll have an Ann Paula post tomorrow

  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  9. Thanks for writing a much needed blog. Are there any juniors or senior mine companies that you like and have confidence in their reserves?

    1. Most resource reports are good, a quick way to check is to look at the metal prices used to calculate the resources, if they are too high (e.g. $1500/oz for gold or $25 for silver) walk away. It basically means the project is uneconomic.

      I've basically been picking some projects were there are obvious issues, so to make you look a bit further than just at the amount of contained metal(s).

      I'm having the feeling that there is still some good potential in the Majors to make some good gains as the well known juniors are probably overvalued at the moment (e.g. Gold Standard Ventures).

  10. To Harry Care;
    Check out TGD-Timmins gold. Check their fundamentals and also do a relative valuation. Personally, I am a shareholder and think it is very undervalued and do have a biases towards TGD. Check them out and let me know what you think. Would love to hear other investors opinion.
    Also, TAG might do an article on one of their main projects.(thanks in advance TAG). His opinion will help me to decide :To add more or not. Since I am not well versed in resource verification, I think TAG's opinion would be best. I read their reports and all and I think its good though. Lets wait and see.

  11. TGD.v has been on my radar for a while. Uber good liquidity. (easy to get in and/or out) http://pennystockjournal.blogspot.ca/2013/01/timmins-gold-corp-tmmt.html

    In the for what it's worth department a body has many sayings to fall back on in this game. I refer this time to "never try and catch a falling knife" and the ORE.v fiasco. 30% cut in reserves is massive and could make the entire proposition uneconomic. Worst thing is the track records of the rock mutts involved, who have pulled this chit multiple times. Avoid ORE.v at ANY PRICE. There is far too much out there in the alternative.