Rick,
I know you're trying to help. Maybe the following quote will help your thinking.
Le Furlong to CL/Frank/Matt/whazzisname:
"Although we have yet to see any recovery information in writing from the consultants, we understand verbally that although low, Au, Pt, and Pd was recovered."
Maybe this will help Chucau with his evaluation of the "too good to announce" rumor, as well.
Regarding the financing: Why would anyone loan IPM $10MM at a rate below prime?
Of course, as of the present, no one has. But if someone should loan them the money, what extra juice do you suppose would have to be part of the financing....considering that IPM has not been able to find a viable recovery process despite burning umpteen million dollars over the course of how many years?
But we are trying another 30 processes, aren't we....
The letter also included the following astounding statement -- astounding since we've all been led to expect the SHOWTIME recovery announcement:
"The recent 3rd party work by Bateman/BD was designed to again establish that precious metals existed at Black Rock via a selected recovery process this time with chain of custody samples."
Apparently IPM had already abandoned the much touted process that yielded 0.25+ Au with no degredation.
Apparently IPM thought that the recovery process results signed off by BD back in 1995 needed additional support?
Again, "This was not a test of the efficiency of a particular recovery method but to confirm that the 20 June AGM recovery results were true, that Au, Pt and Pd existed at Black Rock."
An interesting test of the "truth" of the AGM-announced recovery results; viz., the AGM announcement is to be deemed "true" if ANY Au, Pt and Pd are recovered -- any at all.
A more strict test of truth might require recovery of, say, at least 0.50 Au-equivalent. Then we could believe the 0.81 number released at the AGM. Instead we get "low Au, Pt and Pd".
Doesn't pass my olfactory purity test!
O. H.
O. H.
|
