Wednesday, February 22, 2017

GMV - Wild West - Never trust anyone in a Mexican Hat

Companies like GMV are a joke, and if I was Dr. D.R. Webb PhD, P.Geol, P.Eng I would be embarrassed to even call myself a profession geologist, I wouldn't even use this PR to wipe a flatulent hippo's arse.

Here is the headline.

Nothing special
So why don't we look at the accompanying table of results:

Where the heck is that intercept? I see a 27.4m @ 0.2 g/t Au for hole 2016-07 but nothing for hole 2016-08, where is the 2-3m wide high-grade zone surrounded a load of stuff grading 0.1 g/t Au?

Ohhhhh, they've done a Arizona Mining, but forgot the work CUMULATIVE. So in reality we have 27.4m @ 0.87 g/t Au in 6 separate, narrow (widest is only 6.1m wide) gold bearing zones over a total length of 125m.

Here is the table with the missing intervals inserted

I've used some technical terms here....
And this is what it looks like visually

red is good
I'm feeling poetic at the moment, and as the internet is a wonderful place, I decided that a video is worth a thousands words. Here is subtle metaphor for GMV and the Mexican Hat project.

Ian Klassen starts talking at 0:19

I think the hippo is called Eric....

The flying shit is what I think of this project and company.


  1. Hey AG, was wandering if you saw the news update on Ana Paula Infill drilling.they did about 34 core holes and it sounds good. what are your thought?
    seems like you were right, they seem to be thinking of underground mining too and also right on them improving recovery. Would love to hear your thoughts

  2. 'wipe a flatulent hippo's arse' - Damn AG I just hates it when yer soooo politically correct all the time. When are you gonna tell it like it is?

    Butt seriously, this example pretty well takes the professional chit thrower cake. (and that takes some doing)

  3. Hey, AG, can you have a look at the Balmoral Resources( and nexus gold(Nxs.v) drill results when you have time? Thanks a lot

  4. hey AG, was wandering how much difference infill drilling makes to already assumed resources. I understand it gives more confidence to the old resources but what should we be looking when a company does infill resources.
    You have already done analysis on Ana Paula and you say its good for a junior. Timmins released updates stating that they have drilled 34 core holes out of which some are still pending. If you look at the image they released about drill location, the holes that starts with 17 are current core holes and pending but it seems to be outside the old pit boundry. What do you think about that? Also it seems they are interested in underground mining too. Does the new drill result make you think they have the underground potential? if so , would greatly appreciate if you can tell us how you came to that conclusion? and what drill holes you looked at to come to the conclusion.

    We really appreciate you teaching us the nuances of the mining PRs. Thank you once again and would love your thoughts soon.

    1. The underground potential is not based on any current drilling (holes are only 200 meters deep) which is to upgrade inferred to indicated to measured in the pit resource as well as possibly improve overall grade by better defining the higher grade envelopes. The underground "interest" can be visualized based on this:

    2. I'll see what I can do, it will probably be after the PDAC

  5. Thank you Tom. I understand that infill is to upgrade resources. going over the drills results , some holes like AP16-246 seems to going pretty deep past the pit bottom. May be they are the old holes.

    I was also referring to AP17- holes some of which are inside the pit in north side of the pit but some like 6 pending holes are outside the pit limit towards north east . Was asking AG about his thoughts on why they are drilling outside the pit? may be they see good potential to extend the pit and also increase resources. Also I wanted to see what AG thoughts are about the new drill results since he already did analysis on the project.

  6. GMV's response from their Feb 27 PR:

    The Company also wishes to clarify the sub-heading on its news release issued on Tuesday, February 21, 2017. The sub-heading included a cumulative intersection width and weighted grade calculation. These are used by the Company to assess drill holes where multiple gold bearing zones are encountered. It was inadvertently included in the final release and should have not been reported, or reported as a "cumulative" figure. The tabulated figures presented in that release are correct and can be relied upon. Management regrets the error and wishes to thank those interested parties who have brought it to the attention of the Company.

    PS - The kids really enjoyed the hippo farts.

    1. Will you be at PDAC? I'm very curious how a geo works his/her way thru that show.

    2. I will be, I like to get there early, before everyone arrives so I can walk around and see where each company is located and gives me a chance to react the advertising blurb without talking to the IR people.

  7. nice and informative blog we appreciate the concerns of writer about these things and the he shared the information is good