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: Larry Brubaker who wrote (31015)	3/16/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: BillyZoom	Read Replies (2) of 35569

I am a Maxam shareholder so this is not intended to start a pissing match. Here is how I see things and maybe I am misunderstanding something here so if you can just answer a few simple questions for me it would help to support what you are saying. 1) IPM has already incurred and paid for the bulk of the cost to achieve COC resource status which should only be months away. Exactly what are the projected costs and how far is Maxam time wise from a proven resource status that the market will accept? 2) "Verge of bankruptcy" is a heavy statement to make. Can you prove this with facts? Financing comes with dilution. What are the number of issued and outstanding shares of MXAM and IPM. Why can't IPM still finance and have less shares out than MXAM? 3) IPM has already seen and had option on Hewletts process. They are proving COC resource first and while this is going on they are trying different methods of extraction to see which one will be optimum for the final bankable resource/recovery cost analysis. Higher recovery numbers do not necessarily mean economical recovery. IMHO this is new science and to commit to one process before the resource calculation is ludicrous and would be viewed as hype (previously IPM's big mistake). When the resource numbers are finalized then the results of the different recovery methods IPM has tested can be analyzed for cost effectiveness and bankable feasibility. You say IPM has no recovery process yet it is only logical that in the worst case scenario IPM can use Hewletts process any time they like? I would think this would be in Runyon's and his holding companies best interest. Don't get me wrong here, they're both good companies with strong potential and years of experience. I just see incredible value in IPM at these levels. TIA Rob

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next