SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (27221)11/17/1997 3:31:00 PM
From: HungryLion  Read Replies (2) of 35569
 
If I was long IPMCF I would contact Bateman to see if they will
confirm the assumption that they performed complete chain of custody
of the fire assay samples. It is not obvious from the FAQ either,


Q1. Were the chain of custody samples used for the fire assay taken
from the same two samples located by Bateman throwing darts for
the verification test?

Yes, the "chain of custody" sample (181T) seen in the "Range of
Results" table was a split of the same samples that Bateman used
in their recovery testing. The sample...


All it says is that the fire assay samples were taken from a split of
Batemans samples for recovery testing. So what? This does not
necessarily mean that Bateman did COC on both.

TruthseekingLion
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News