Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Dakota Slim

Rye Patch Gold Corp Q1 2018 Results

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
Edited by Dakota Slim
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.23 gpt, is that good or bad?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the Hycroft claim area still open to metal detectorist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats almost a 1/4 ounce per ton. In the disseminated gold world thats pretty good. Running that many tons per truck, adds up fast. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Geo, i just seen you said gpt. Is that correct? Because .23 gpt isnt good lol. I was thinking .23 ounces per ton haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GeoJack said:

.23 gpt, is that good or bad?

 

Where did you get the figure of .23 gpt at?, I didn't see that figure mentioned anywhere in the press release.

But to answer your question, No, less than1/4 gram per ton is not good at all, but they did way better than that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i couldnt find it either. Thought maybe i was missing something lol. .23 gpt would be considered very low grade and stock piled to be ran with a high grade blend that is high in sulfides. We would blend the two to "cool" down the mixture going into the mill so the roaster didnt overheat from the high grade sulfide ore. Which typically ran .13 to .50 ounces per ton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came out with a couple of different numbers, but my higher number was about .23 grams per ton.  I think the ore is a little misleading. I think there is some of that ore that is overburden and tossed to the side.  That is less that $1 per ton of gold.  If .23 g/ton is the truth the company will quickly burn through investor capitol.  Highest number I got was dividing 22,300 Toz gold on pad by 1,856,400 tons and multiplying that by 32 grams per ton, came out around .4 gm per ton, or perhaps a little over $1 per ton (22300/1856400*32).  Better than most of the ground I've worked on placers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The only difference is the CPT "Cost Per Ton" to produce an ounce of disseminated gold. CIL  "Carbon In Leaching" is very expensive. Then there is the treating of the carbon with all of the other steps to strip the gold from the carbon slurry. 

 

 

Edited by nugget108

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The math;

  • Crushed 2,151,900 tons of ore;
  • Produced 10,844 ounces of gold and 5,457 ounces of silver;
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really seems to me a lot of capable companies create LLCs by raising investor capitol and then spend it in the hopes that they can get a good thing going, and it totally fails. With numbers like that, I would expect this to fail as soon as investor capital is leveraged out.  If I was told my investment would be $1 per ton, I'd not invest.  I hope its a bad month, and gold production will ramp up.  Met someone a few years ago who had been hired to take core samples in the local area, but his core sample did not go that deep, and he staked a lot of claims, all incorrectly, and lost them all.  Still no production in the area.  To me that was financed by a bunch of investors, and this mine is a larger scale.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like another penny stock.  Is sitting slightly over $1 as it has for years, with one brief spike to $2.  Nothing I would consider investing in.  Nice to see some mining activity though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×