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: Anne Lamb who wrote (29579)1/2/1998 1:50:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker  Read Replies (1) of 35569
 
Anne: Maybe you should consider the possibility that BD's "in our opinion...it appears that" statement regarding Naxos COC is due to the circumstances as they observed them, as opposed to a lack of backbone on BD's part.

I have no idea what the story is, but it seems possible to me given BD's wording that Naxos did not allow BD to maintain its own COC, but limited their role to observing Naxos' COC procedures.

Given BD's definitive wording concerning COC of Delgratia ore, it appears possible to me that BD didn't actually maintain COC on Naxos ore, thus the more wishy washy wording.

If that is the case, I would not necessarily blame BD for the wording. The COC procedure may have not been under their control, and they worded their COC statement accordingly. In fact, if that is the case, I would not want BD to make a more definitive COC statement.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News