I will take the word of a recent print article in a major paper than some crackots off the internet word for it.
You're trusting the main stream media and the articles written by people with degrees that are probably little more than creating writing? You're stupider than I thought!
To give him credit, the SMH is fairly evolved for a GC'er. Usually, if it wasn't in the Bulletin, it never happened.
I will trust that over idiots on the internet who have no idea how these things work, considering the source quoted in that article. Lead + zinc is the primary metal produced at cannington, not silver even the production charts/diagrams show they concentrate lead and zinc then extract the silver from this concentrate. + a recent aarticle saying silver is a byproduct at these mines and will be left in the ground to support the silver price I font know how much more proof you need it is not the primary metal here they are talking about not even extracting it.
No offence, but you are demonstrating your total lack of knowledge of extractive metallurgy and mining. For example, lets take Newcrest, a well known gold miner (primary gold). They have a mine in NSW - Cadia Valley. From their own website: http://www.newcrest.com.au/our-business/operations/cadia-nsw/ That equates to 18 tonnes of gold, and 60,612 tonnes of copper...... from a primary gold mine. That's right... 60,000 tonnes of copper by product, from 18 tonnes of primary gold. Your SMH article and production charts mean SFA.
pic of trucks backing :lol: [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXa_B3Hl38I[/youtube] one man's treasure is another's trash top soil is farmers' treasure but it is a politician's sh*t
Different mine, different company different metals and situation infact just different all round and not really relevant as gold is as you said the primary metal and is the primary metal as it is taken out in the first float as it is the heavier metal, so I dont disagree with you here but that is not the case with cannington where there is talk about not extracting silver at all at current prices. this mine just couldnt not extract gold if the price dropped like they can do at cannington. with silver if they choose Edit: I also dont think your the idiot WRCMD I was directing those comments to the other bloke, but I still dont believe you are correct in saying cannington is a primary silver mine here
Was there a comment about a mexican before ? ..i think its time for a few tequilas after reading this thread :
"Silver Investing News recently covered the world's top silver-producing companies and countries of 2013, and if there's one takeaway from those lists, it's that silver is usually produced as a by-product. That said, the world definitely contains some major primary silver mines. Here's a look at the 10 that produced the most silver last year, along with some information about their owners and locations. 1. Cannington The Queensland-based Cannington mine, owned by BHP Billiton (NYSE:BHP,ASX:BHP,LSE:BLT), is the world's largest and lowest-cost silver and lead mine, according to Mine Sites. The deposit was discovered in 1990 by BHP Minerals and the mine was commissioned in 1997. Full production started in 1999, and in 2013 the mine produced 966 metric tons (MT) of silver. Cannington now employees about 900 people and is an underground mine that uses both open-stope and bench-mining methods." http://silverinvestingnews.com/2578...-fresnillo-hochschild-coeur-hecla-mcewen.html Considering all of the mines that produce silver, some that produce minor amounts, others produce major amounts - (compared to the total new supply) - Cannington is a primary producer, producing more that other mines. "Primary producer" is not a statement about what that mine produces, it is a statement about total silver produced. If we are talking about silver production, it is a primary producer. If we are talking about what Cannington produces, then it is not a primary silver producer.
I understand that silver is a byproduct of mining for other base metals or at least the term, it just so happens so is dirt. Seems we have enough dirt at the moment. For some reason the term byproduct somehow makes silver sound cheaper or unwanted. Really though, silver is not a bad byproduct to have unlike dirt, its just that its that much rarer than the other base metals in the back of the dumpster and I'm sure does not make as much money for the miners that are primarily after something else. In the end though, it has a price per/oz higher than other base metals. Personally, I believe silver will have it day. Not due to market crashes or the collapse of the USD, but due to its properties (perhaps both). With medical applications and technologies advancing at such a rapid rate, the white metal is bound to find its day in something we have not yet conceived, in quantities much greater than we currently use. With its cost at these levels it's seems to me our byproduct offers a lot for the money (fiat, for those that can't cope with it). Remembering, currently this byproduct is also a waste product, for the most part practical cost effective recycling of silver is not viable and therefore simply discarded. I know this has all been said before, but this game that is precious metals is not about the facts, its more like religion, you just have to have faith - Nothing has changed except for the price.... Silver is precious and it's useful - Thats a fact! Gold on the other hand...........
just pick up your silver coin, it usually say " 999 FINE silver" :lol: never seen one which say problem silver the day the prices die. all will be FLAT for a while.
