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: Karl Zetmeir who wrote (20099)	9/8/1997 9:01:00 AM
From: KipferlMeister	of 35569

Karl, A good friend of mine who's an architect often laments that designs are mostly awarded on cost alone. That there are many criteria for judging the merits of a design of which cost should (in a perfect world) be the least important. In some ways this reminds me of this situation with IPM, where we single mindedly focus on the timing of a BD sign-off. "When, when, when?????" we keep screaming -- even though the question of "when?" is really incidental to what the sign-off will mean for the company. For all I know, we could still get the damned thing before market open today, but if not, it's sad to think we'd lose some people if it's another week, or even a month away. Given the history of past delays, I guess the focus on time is understandable. but at a time when the simplest court case drags on for months, drug approvals can be expected to take years, and the wait for a usable operating system from Microsoft still stretches on open ended, isn't it absurd to expect a possible mining revolution to come in right on schedule??? FWIW. -Michael

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next