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 : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T.F. who wrote (4910)	1/17/2006 9:41:33 PM
From: jennifersilversun	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78419

I'll send them an email and give them a call tomorrow and let you know what they say. In my forensic retrospective of my communications with CGE, I have decided that one reason drill results were released so late is that they may well have been sent in stages to the lab, and they may well have been waiting for the very last test before they had to report coming up utterly empty handed. Originally there was talk of releasing assays results as they came due, as opposed to in stages, and given their concern with share price, and that the water well holes were the first drill targets, the tip-off to the impending bad news was that there was no-news. I think if the water well hole had duplicated earlier results we would have heard, though I believe that not all the results were in at that point. That said, there is much virtue to CC's approach, which consists of restricting one's focus to documents and reports for which the company is liable, and to evaluating the resume of the principals involved in any given mining company. jss, having completed another wordy posting. . .