International Precious Metals (IPMCF) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: mjglass who wrote (24155)	11/3/1997 3:58:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	of 35569

mjg; I have long since learned that the DD of many spec funds is far from rigorous, and depends on some research and then an odds playing exercise, where they will put 1/2% in this and 1/2% in that and so on over a group of high risk plays. I think if you look at the Midas fund you will find this pattern. I would like to see some amplification of their BRE-X cautions, Barricks precaution was the reserved right to drill some holes and do their own assays. An estimated cost of around $50,000 with use of drills already on site. When BRE-X refused this Barrick walked. For 200,000 shares worth, say $6 =$1.2 million a $50,000 due diligence is defensable. Did they do that??, or read some papers and go on trust?? The only valid DD here is a watched drill hole, samples of core/grit watched, and sampled and split and sent for assays at two labs capable of the nickel sulfur fusion test. The old reports from museums are also useless, as they are stuck in the mud of old tech, and so I am just really a hopeful skeptic suggesting ways for IPM to cut to the chase. But they do not. why?? Bill

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next