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: Bob Jagow who wrote (27296)	11/17/1997 11:00:00 PM
From: Alan Vennix	Read Replies (2) of 35569

TO: AlwaysHopefulBob FROM: GlassHalfFullAlan I'm with you, Bob. I think there's a lot to this story that we don't know yet, and it could very well be that good news is not that far off. Regarding the "non-commercial" process tested by Bateman and reported in the PR as having recovered gold and platinum. Remember that the recovery numbers presented at the AGM were obtained at Friendship in their large equipment. Bateman was forced to do the verification experiments in the glass vessels in the mobile trailer. To assure recovery of assayable quantities of metal (not the large quantities that would have been produced in the Friendship equipment), they may have been limited in the type of experiment they could run and chose to run under "non-commercial" conditions, eg at higher temperatures or for longer times than what they would have considered commercial. Under those conditions, I think it would have been prudent for them to only say gold and platinum are recoverable, but not give quantities because of the "non-commercial" experiment. That doesn't mean IPM's leach tests reported at the AGM are necessarily non-commercial, only that the run Bateman made was at non-commercial conditions. Further, Bateman may want to compare a variety of recovery process before saying what is the most efficient and economical. The jury's still out, IMO, and I'm not ready to throw stones at IPM. They clearly stated that the Fire Assay test results presented at the AGM were very recent and hadn't been confirmed or tested extensively. Let's wait and see what Bateman says about recovery. I don't think they've been sitting on their hands since the September experiments and may already have some excellent leads. FWIW Alan

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next