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.

Technology Stocks : Xenolix Technologies (XTCI) 'Ecstasy'(Formerly MGAU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuca Marsh who wrote (4542)	8/9/1999 7:14:00 PM
From: geoffreycs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5143

From lasers site "Several years ago, the Nevada Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) asked me to help them determine how one laboratory was apparently salting samples from a cinder-cone property that they were promoting by way of inviting people to invest in their project. After being unable to duplicate the results produced by the laboratory in question through umpire assays at other laboratories, the SEC visited the lab and videotaped their procedure for assaying samples. They then obtained, on my recommendation, a sample of all chemicals that were added to samples during the course of the assay so that I could check them for gold contamination. Had I detected contamination of gold in one of the chemicals (which I did not), it could have been argued that the "salting" was inadvertent and that we were dealing with mere incompetents. Results of my contamination check led to the conclusion that gold was being added covertly and intentionally and that an intentional scam was being perpetrated on investors. The SEC went so far as to have me duplicate exactly the assaying steps of the other laboratory, which included the unusual step of adding sugar to the sample at one point, to confirm that their slightly different procedure was not actually responsible for liberating some unassayable gold in the samples. Using their exact methodology and samples did not, of course, result in our being able to detect significant gold in their property's samples because they were covertly salting the samples in their laboratory during assaying. Even careful screening of the videotape of their assaying steps did not reveal at which step they were doing the salting, however. Unfortunately, the SEC determined that they had insufficient evidence with which to prosecute the con artists and reluctantly stopped pursuing the case. "

To: Chuca Marsh who wrote (4542)	8/9/1999 7:24:00 PM
From: geoffreycs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5143

recorder.maricopa.gov