Carlo and Mr. Schulz, thank you for your kind comments and ideas. I have as yet, not been contacted to replace any Naxos lawyers but I'm certainly open to any offers!
On a more serious note, however, I can't say as I would disagree with the principle behind the Naxos approach. When you are a company trying to prove what many would prefer not be proven, and what many will question (enthusiastically I might add),ie. the reality of microfine PM's, I would NOT want some marketing person driving the information content. We would have had headlines like the one posted earlier here about "LARGEST DEPOSIT EVER" and not be anywhere NEAR ready to prove it.
Personally, I would want to know that the company is ABSOLUTELY on solid ground with every sentence, every phrase, every word, comma, and especially every disclaimer. This is a high stakes game and accuracy is everything.
It is the same reason the lab is so slow coming out with numbers and also why we should not expect a quick turnaround on the numbers even once they are completed. It is an approach similar to the carpenters credo - measure twice, cut once.
I was chatting with a very astute and knowledgable person about the whole Naxos story recently and we agreed that we actually have a problem with Naxos as shareholders. We want updates every 3 or 4 hours. How many people follow IBM or Intel or Microsoft as closely as we, average shareholders, follow Naxos? Would I LIKE to know what is going on each minute? Of course! Is it a reasonable expectation? Probably not.
No more than we need to know what is going on in the kitchen from the second we order our dinner to the second it arrives. I put myself through college in many kitchens and believe me you DON'T want to know everything that goes on back there. What we need to know is - did the waiter or waitress get the order right, will I be served what I ordered in a timely fashion and will it be hot?
I am convinced, as my last post outlines, that the most recent events spell out very clearly that we can expect very good news coming up. I don't know what those numbers will be, but they must be good to have things going the way they are. So therefore, to follow the above analogy, I think they got the order right (there are considerable PM's) we WILL be served what we ordered (new undisputable proof of PM's) I can't say as that it will be timely to OUR standard, but it will be hot (the largest deposit ever earning tremendous interest of major players and a stock price to match).
Waiter, I'm ready for the main course now!!!!!!
Thankful Regards,
Tom F.
Mark, in one of your last posts, and by the way, you have added some really great insights on many of those, you had a question about my comments on "proof of PM's". Yes you are correct, the SRK hole was chain of custody, but the age of the samples seemed to create an impression, an INCORRECT one, that for some reason they could not be considered "secure" for such a long duration of time. The market told us quite clearly that SRK results, though promising, were not necessarily representative of what would be found with the BD holes. As a result, my comments reflect the markets attitude, not my opinion regarding the SRK numbers. Now, having said that, I am very curious as to who really drove the price to most recent highs of $7.50 plus based on those same SRK numbers. Were these NEW buyers or old reliables increasing their positions? |
