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 : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Steel who wrote (162)	10/12/2001 9:28:26 PM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 39344

Jim, I'd like to post it here, as there have been certain accusations levied against some of us by a rather sick individual on a certain thread we used to frequent. In fact, I may be done here the way it's going. But for now, I'm interested in complete transparency, and a level playing field even for those here who aren't paying for your service. There is plenty of liquidity for everyone in GEO, and I think this may be an exceptional opportunity. I have put, and I'm willing to put an additional bet on. If we all make money off of good solid legwork and info, I'm sure those people will know what to do ,and hopefully we can move this kind of stuff later to your setup (whenever it's ready?), and have complete privacy. First, the restructuring looks very good. Toxic warrant issue is over. Stock should be higher just on that. These are the main issues that I see. Hopefully, we can get them early Monday? 1. The stakeholder situation is, shall we say peculiar. Almost all shareholders are at a strategic disadvantage because we don't know the intent of the two vendors who now have 23% controlling interest. Is there a lockup agreement? I think that should disclosed. What do these vendors have in mind with the shares? What have they told GEO, as after all GEO gave them controlling interest? 2. Royal Trust, one of the larger holders dumped 1,672,500 shares in Sept, and has 6,839,000 shares left on 9/30. Once volume picked up today they were selling again (Octogan). What kind of work has Paterson done to deal with indiscriminate microcap dumping (like the big cross that IP did)? Where has their big institution, McKenzie, been through all of this? 3. An of course the operation. The conference call in August when the stock blew apart said they should have a cure by "early October". Now, we hear about storms and rain in CA. Is that just an excuse? What going on in plain English? 4. When Paterson interviewed Northern Miner, it is obvious a merger with some party was discussed. I'm guessing somebody wanted legbreaker terms, trying to take advantage of the distress? With this successful restructuring done, and with the answer to question 3 close at hand, are they going to go back to the table? Those are my fly on the wall questions. Maybe the company should just make a clear statement about all this? And if so, then ask him when. Will they be scheduling a third quarter call in the next three weeks?

To: Jim Steel who wrote (162)	10/15/2001 4:21:16 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

¿Es yacimiento, o yacija? ... [deposit, or grave?] -g- ... russ covered the financing clarification questions well, my main question is what's happening at the mine, how are the new pad setups working out, by how much was production set back by the rains, what is the near-term outlook for production, stuff like that .... central questions and you will ask them of course. Good to see Resource Capital being less grabby than they could have been ... this will work to their own long-term advantage no matter what happens with Geomaque Octagon still on the offer ... I was the other day examining my reasons for not subscribing to newsletters, and here's one - doing so means you have to be careful what you say, you have to filter out that which you heard from the NLW from what you heard in releases or from the company or what you thought out on your own .... because of the non-disclosure thing that is vital to any NL-subscriber contract .... so in that sense a person loses another facet of independence ... as it stands i can say anything that comes to mind, and i sort of like that ... just an observation, and of course there are pros to the question as well .... cheers