Paying on Assay

[Topher_osAUrus]

Most commercial refiners do not inquart for karat, just a direct dissolve, so cold filtration through a tight paper (requiring good vacuum) is very important.

I must assume that, it is simply a time factor for them?
Where as, taking the time to calculate silver, inquart, nitric digest, then moving ar is longer in the end than just dissolving it all in ar. Of course, with plenty of constant agitation to continually knock of the chloride crusts.

Does that have an impact on accountability for them? With the gold that inevitably is trapped in some of the crusty pieces of AgCl?

 

[nickvc]

Topher when I was commercially refining all results were based on agreed assays on melted bars so it made little difference if we mislaid a few grams so long as we could replace them from stock or it was covered by the retention charge, we could and did recover it all later.
I imagine most large refineries will work on the same principles and will mix lots and remelt to avoid having too much silver in any batch to cause problems for a direct AR digestion, I did the same thing when low silver was reported or expected straight to AR and yes it is about speed but you can achieve very high grade gold doing this.

 

[4metals]

As Nick said, pay on assay, batch lots together to keep silver content under 8%, and process in AR. Convert chlorides to metal and melt and assay bar for silver and gold. Process silver in the cell and recover the gold when you clean up the cell.

It all comes out in the wash. And monitoring step by step accountability for each process is something larger refiners just do. For example, if you add up all of the expected assays for gold on a particular refining lot, and your actual yield comes out in excess of 99.5%, then the assumption is made that the gold is in the chlorides (pretty safe assumption). If this is the case some just store the chlorides and batch process them together to save labor. They still assay them and the bean counter up front keeps tabs of what lots were in what melt and how much gold is theoretically in there. If a particular lot accountability is under house standards, the chlorides are processed and assayed immediately to be sure the gold is accounted for.

Then all of the silver bars are run in a cell, with the same bean counter calculating the gold assays for all of the bars in the cell. And again, in the end, the actual yield needs to match up with the expected yield. As daunting as all of the accounting sounds, a simple spreadsheet makes it very organized and do-able.

As both Chris and I have been hammering home for years now, Fire assays make the world go 'round. All serious refiners do them.

 

[Topher_osAUrus]

.. agreed assays on melted bars ...

I imagine most large refineries will work on the same principles and will mix lots and remelt to avoid having too much silver in any batch to cause problems for a direct AR digestion, I did the same thing when low silver was reported or expected straight to AR and yes it is about speed but you can achieve very high grade gold doing this.

I figured it was based on that principle.
The agreed assay.

I mainly asked (hate to skew this thread any more, but..)
Because the local jeweler I deal with, showed me a picture of the last bar he sent off to a refiner as well as the assay report.
The bar was only drilled one time, dead center. The bar was plum 14k, but the assay came back 9% off (on that one, others were more, another was less).

I told him they should have drilled multiple spots diagonally, and again inverted on the back side. And that their "2% charge" seems to be made up by other means.. Like such.

I was wondering if that could have been a possibility why, but, if they are paying out of stock then its irrelevant. And leaves few options left as to "why" it was so far under. ..xrf err, theft, who knows.. Guess I shouldn't ponder it too much, just be thankful, as it is why he is having me do his next lot.

Thanks guys

 

[anachronism]

Hehe I do prefer how it appears to work over here because we just don't seem to get these problems. If the jeweller was making bars to the same standard you are he probably wouldn't have as many of them.

All refineries lie. It's just how much they lie that differentiates one from another.

 

[4metals]

Topher,

How big was the bar? Seems strange that any decent refiner will be drilling anything but the smallest of bars. Usually it's a pin dip sample. And if it is drilled, always more than 1 drill hole to get a more representative sample.

I smell a rat!

All refineries lie. It's just how much they lie that differentiates one from another.

Funny how we complain if a refiner has too many charges, minimums and assay fee's and refining fee's and we all want one low number, in this case 2%. But 2% of a small lot just doesn't pay the rent. The refiner who covers himself with proper charges likely doesn't get the work, it's as simple as that. But having to revert to stealing seems to be a position a lot of refiners are forced into by greedy customer. It's a vicious cycle. Witness and take a sample for your own assay and this problem goes away!

 

[anachronism]

It's definitely a vicious cycle. You cannot make a living at the published prices of 2% or lower it just doesn't compute. Take a look at the books of most refineries and the numbers simply do not add up.

Even many guys doing small scale toll refines fall into the trap of quoting five/ten percent and then have to nick a bit in order to make it worth their while. Sadly they won't get the work in the first place if they quote higher so it ends up as you say, in a vicious cycle.

No fingers being pointed to any of the good guys on here- just stating my own personal experiences and information from others who are "in the game."

Edit: I have stated publicly that I charge 20% on numerous occasions but my clients consistently get the same and more back than people who quote ten percent or lower. Funny that....

 

[4metals]

Any collector today charging 2% is making money. The big refiners they send to are paying 99.7% or better so if you're shipping a decent quantity a week you make money. They keep the silver on the smaller lots yet get paid for it, and they pay for silver on larger lots but charge more than they're paying. A gold buyer bringing in 350 ounces of karat scrap a day and charging 2% is content. Just maybe not content enough to squeeze out another 1 or 2% because you're not there watching. :twisted:

Think about it this way. Harold charged 10% back in the day when gold was in the $200-$300 range. At today's prices, that is do-able with enough customers coming in the door because 2% today, dollar wise is 10% back when Harold was refining.

 

[Topher_osAUrus]

Topher,

How big was the bar? Seems strange that any decent refiner will be drilling anything but the smallest of bars. Usually it's a pin dip sample. And if it is drilled, always more than 1 drill hole to get a more representative sample.
2800 grams was one, another was around 3500, the other 2 I don't remember. Each was only drilled a single time dead center on one side though. I tried explaining to him about a homogeneous melt, as well as multiple drillings in the correct spots (and what little else i know of proper assays), but he is from vietnam, and moved here 25 years ago, so his english can be spotty at times. But, he understood the bottom line. That i can save him money and time.
I smell a rat!
I found the assay reports odd as well. Where it simply showed a picture of his bar with a drilled hole, and the "report" was something I could knock out on microsoft word. Sketchy at best..

All refineries lie. It's just how much they lie that differentiates one from another.

Fine line to dance, is it not? ...so far I have tried to be as straightforward and honest with clients as humanly possible, although sometimes it would be much easier to tell them a fabrication
Funny how we complain if a refiner has too many charges, minimums and assay fee's and refining fee's and we all want one low number, in this case 2%. But 2% of a small lot just doesn't pay the rent. The refiner who covers himself with proper charges likely doesn't get the work, it's as simple as that. But having to revert to stealing seems to be a position a lot of refiners are forced into by greedy customer. It's a vicious cycle. Witness and take a sample for your own assay and this problem goes away!

He says they ONLY take 2%, and charge $25 for the assay, and that is the only charges, but when their assay comes back a couple karat off, that 8% plus the 2% charge definitely makes a HUGE difference in return when you are talking a couple kilo's of gold or more.. I told him numerous times to join the forum, and even offered to lend him some of my books on refining so he can have a better understanding of the processes and where losses can occur..

Should this thread be split off to its own? Or added to a similar one?

 

[4metals]

You can lead a horse to water........but you can't make him drink!

Should this thread be split off to its own? Or added to a similar one?

Likely it should, I am not too good at that, I've screwed up a thread or two trying. PM Dave, he is the splitmeister!

 

[Topher_osAUrus]

8) and the rate, really depends on the LOT

The silicon valley toll, even with him letting me keep 20% instead of 15, I went negative.

The nasa toll, was 15% and I came out a little ahead.

Its all one big variable, getting the right rate for the right scrap can make or break you. Thank god this isnt my only source of income, or there would have been a very upset wife a couple of times when the melt was all said and done.

I may not be getting rich by doing my tolls, but the stuff I buy outright has been treating me well, and because of my transparency for those I work for, I have gained continued work, and a couple good friends from it. ..hell, its just money... Can't take it with me, and I don't want to spoil my kids so they dont know the value of a dollar and the satisfaction of a good days work.

...although it would be nice to have a nissan skyline gtr...

 

[4metals]

Possibly a formulation based on incoming weight plus a percentage. It is proportional to your acid usage. So if you were to charge $X an ounce incoming plus a lower percentage your acid is covered. Component scrap is a whole new world and you have to work out a number to cover your outlays at a minimum. This way, worst case scenario, you wasted time but not expenses.

 

[Justincase]

I get all my stock,one ring or chain at a time.
The only bar's are finished 999 bullion.
It is very nice to be independent and only have my bottom line to cow down too.
I simply put all my stock filled and karat into one good alloy that I think should part readily.
It is never quite perfect,some times the parting produces Au too divided to decant nicely,other times I have a lump or two that will not part at all.
No big deal it all cleans up with in a day,or gets added to next weeks mix.
The main thing is providing a reliable service that lets people liquidate there alloy for a fair price.
I think Harold's Model of 10% tole fee is quite fair and a walk in with a small bit of jewellery should be content with 80% spot.
Pay your specialist well or they have no reason to guard your interest's.This hold's true every where from building work to close protection.

 

[4metals]

Toll refining for high grade like jewelry is a world of difference from scrap components. And even at 10% you are covering your acids and disposal so incoming weight charges aren't necessary.

But a customer bringing in components has to be told that they can have anywhere between X and Y value of precious metals in them and you want to report an accurate figure, not recover one thing and tell them something else. So they may come to grips with a fee based on incoming weight, and it may encourage them to clean the stuff up before they give it to you. Then your toll is strictly profit as long as it exceeds your expenses. But the risk is less because you know how much acid it takes per ounce and you know your disposal times and $ spent so that part should be easy to work out. Now if the scrap is a total bust and you don't recover even your expenses, you know not to take that in any more! Either way the customer never lays out cash, it all comes out of the yield.

 

[upcyclist]

More thoughts on the "incoming by weight" fee. You may find that you can charge different rates for at least untouched boards vs. components. Partly because you'll have a better idea of the base metals involved once the PCB is out of the picture, but also because that will perhaps convince the customer to do some cleanup of their own. On the other hand, telling them it's one charge either way might do the same convincing, especially if you point out that it's the same per ounce whether or not the circuit board is there. When the PCB is there, the per-ounce fee also covers the labor/PITA factor.

 

[Topher_osAUrus]

Toll refining for high grade like jewelry is a world of difference from scrap components. And even at 10% you are covering your acids and disposal so incoming weight charges aren't necessary.
I told him 5 to 10% would easily cover my costs, since he is dealing in large(to me) lots of karat gold. But, I also mentioned when it came to his fluffs and sweeps it would be a different rate. Solely because the amount of work, and number of processes would be greater. When i mentioned I would even recover the gold from his sink pea trap (where he washes his hands after work) as well as dust masks and papertowels that he uses to wipe his touchstone, he laughed, thinking I was joking. :shock: I assured him I was not.

But a customer bringing in components has to be told that they can have anywhere between X and Y value of precious metals in them and you want to report an accurate figure, not recover one thing and tell them something else. So they may come to grips with a fee based on incoming weight, and it may encourage them to clean the stuff up before they give it to you. Then your toll is strictly profit as long as it exceeds your expenses. But the risk is less because you know how much acid it takes per ounce and you know your disposal times and $ spent so that part should be easy to work out. Now if the scrap is a total bust and you don't recover even your expenses, you know not to take that in any more! Either way the customer never lays out cash, it all comes out of the yield.

I like the idea of incoming weight charge, and am leaning towards it more and more. The only exception is I do NOT like telling expected yields. Learned my lesson, learned it well and hard!
Which has made me move "assay ability" up the list on stuff to get and master, because working for other people, they almost expect you to know exactly what is and what it will be. So who am I to deny them that? When buying stuff for myself though, a ballpark is good enough for me, so long as I always err on the side of caution. ..plus its always nice to have more gold in the beaker than you were expecting

 

[anachronism]

Toll refining for high grade like jewelry is a world of difference from scrap components. And even at 10% you are covering your acids and disposal so incoming weight charges aren't necessary.

Oh I should have made the distinction shouldn't I? Apologies guys. Yes jewellery waste is a doddle compared to e-waste. The charges can be way lower and still you would be in profit. There's a lot more prep involved and materials used gramme for gramme on e-waste.

 

[4metals]

Yes jewellery waste is a doddle compared to e-waste.

So Jon, you're telling me for all those years I thought I was a jewelry scrap refiner, I was really a doddler?

 

[Topher_osAUrus]

Better than a diddler, or an escrap fiddler.

I think escrap would be a MUCh more profitable venture for any and every size refiner, if and when a system like Jon's, is successfully put into practice.

That alone would significantly cut the costs of the chemicals and time put in to the gold recovery. I for one, have been eagerly watching the development of that thread (wait, Im drifting again)

But for this thread ...

How can a smaller/hobbyist/backyard refiner go about competing with the big guy, as far as the service and accountability of the assay goes. There aren't a whole lot of options, right?

*Get an xrf - still has a margin of error, expensive
*Set up an assay section in your lab, expensive, but accurate in informed/experienced hands
*??

Surely there must be a practical way to give a reasonably accurate account of the gold, before all the work is said and done. Or is that just the point in time to pony up and step up to the plate?

 

[snoman701]

Bang for the buck, it's in the fire assay. You aren't moving the quantity to buy an XRF. Price is just now becoming reasonable.

Plus the fire assay and a good scale offers the ability to break it down item by item.

Where the xrf would be really nice, is in measuring the composition of the fire assay button.

Just my opinion, but your rates are too low on the e-scrap. You need a recovery charge, then a refining charge. The recovery charge should represent the increased educational time and expertise of recovery. Frankly, your recovery charge should be inversely proportional to the pm weight vs raw weight.

I don't disagree with Jon's ascertation that refineries lie. What I'd like to know is this...if there's 100 employees, how many actually know what the real numbers are. I'd guess zero. I'd imagine that they know that the flyash should produce x g/ton, and the slag should produce y g/ton...and the customer should get z g/ton based upon their representative samples...but all of the fractions along the way take a little. It's sort of like how Harold said that when he processed his hood filters he got 8 oz on average (I think). Does he then owe each refine a little bit more money? Given his throughput & the price of gold at the time, I doubt he'd owe each lot another dollar more than he already paid them.

With E-waste, you are already talking about frictions....now you are talking about frictions of frictions. And with as many variables as there are in e-waste, there's a lot of places to lose frictions. And there's a lot of places where settings are made so that there is no way the refinery is losing money chasing a tiny amount of gold that may or may not exist.

People lie. People cheat. People steal. Bust MOST people are good. I wholeheartedly believe this. So if you have a company with 100 employees, most of those people are good. The scheme can't look like blatant theft.