Terry,
Hi. I've been watching this board for some time now, and i realy appreciate you stamina. Its a good feeling to know that someone out there deals with facts. Must be hard with all this bull**** running rampant through the thread. If Bema is to be faulted, it would be for its honesty. The game isn't realy about numbers though, is it. Its about hype, speculation, and playing with peoples heads. BreX is the prime example. I looked at the numbers coming out of there in the early days and said to myself "no-way",... and I missed the point. BreX had no checks, balances, standards, third-party verification. They had nothing substantial but speculation. It wasn't about the numbers, it was about how far people thought they could run with the story, and they ran a long way. Look at Bema. Bema has the best sampling techniques in the industry. Period. For every dozen assays sent in, Bema includes a duplicate at the drill, a dup at the splitter, blank samples (those checked to have nothing in them), standards (those whose value is known.. from many differnt labs), and duplicates inserted at the lab. No place here for a fiddle. In point, what Bema has, is what Bema says it has. Bema has always done what they said they would do. So where do the game-players go with that? no-where. Its all up front. Bema's value is based on fact. So if only Bema were to maybe hype it up a bit more...., but that's not how they do things, is it. Anyway, people use the "facts" they want to. They can look at the PFS or take some vapour numbers from some anal-ist and run with them as much as they like. oh well.
thanks for being out there. oh, by the way, I would REALY want to be in your shoes come Monday morning... or maybe sooner. lets see. you won't have to say anything then..
john |
