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: Tom Harper who wrote (1144)	1/2/1997 8:34:00 PM
From: Mark Bartlett	of 35569

Tom, I will attempt to answer most of your questions (though I am a poor substitute for CL or Ron) <<1.What is the significance of their finding the "hard rock"?>> It is felt it may be the source of the mineralization for the rest of the area. <<2.Did they drill beyond 30 meters?One of the releases refered to depths of 100 or perhaps 150 meters.>> Yes .... to the best of my knowledge these have not yet been assayed - that will be happening shortly I believe. <<3.What exactly is the method they used to improve their grades by a factor of 6??>> They have apparently made some changes to the leaching solution - as to the specifics - nobody knows (or I do not anyway) .... it may be proprietary - so we may never know. <<4.Is this method friendly to the environment ,better yet ,friendly to the political powers in Arizona?>> I was told that it was a very weak solution and was environmentally friendly. <<6.Did they do any drilling at all on the other 5 grids?If not ,what is the basis for any optimism that results can be replicated there?>> Not to my knowledge (except on the hard rock) .... this will be done as part of the resource valuation. As to part 2 of Q 6 - it is doubtful that the mineralization suddenly stops at the 1 sq km boundaries ... apparently the geology throughout is quite similar. <<7.If there are no third party estimates as to costs of extraction,how about some guesstimates from the management itself?Surely by now someone has thought it might be relevant .>> That will be part of BD's role .... I have only heard rumours that it is cheap .... also, until the process is proven through bulk tests - I doubt we will really have an accurate figure until then. <<8.There's a rumour going around that a newsletter/analyst is coming out with a write-up/recommend ?Might this be Ron Struthers or Jay Taylor?>> Ron has been recommending IPM for _months now - as to Jay Taylor, I was told he put out a buy recently too. <<9.Isn't it odd that new assays were not done for the PGM's at the same time they were done for the gold?I mean,they were twice as rich as gold on the original assays months ago .Wouldn't they constitute a significant factor in the big picture? They were .... results are still being assessed/verified as far as I know - and yes - they are very important. <<10.How do we know this isn't some giant con game?It just seems too good to be true.(please go easy on me here . I'm keeping an open mind.)>> Well - if it is, it is one of the most elaborate ones ever attempted. I can only say that I have personally briefly met the company players - and IMO this is no con game. The company has been around a few years now .... I suspect that if this was a con, they would have packed up long ago. I hope that has been some help. MB

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next