Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Manhattan Minerals (MAN.T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeff Dickson who wrote (2682)	6/29/1999 7:52:00 PM
From: Elizabeth Andrews	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4504

I meant what is the price of gold now, in real terms, if you extrapolated $300 forward? Obviously more than the $260 it is at but how much? My point is that in real terms there is less reason to assay for gold now that then as the real price was much higher than now. So why is this so important now when the real economic significance of gold's value in this deposit is lees important? Is it because the real value of copper is so much less? If so, why wasn't this deposit developed a long time ago when its real NSR value was higher because copper was higher in real terms as its principally a copper deposit? So, you are arguing that copper is not that important anymore but gold is because its lower in real terms?