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: E. Charters who wrote (21429)	9/19/2006 8:42:31 AM
From: BensonInvestor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78405

Re: E. Charters posted dismissive, negative sentiment about CCH Good morning E. Charters. I can feel the apology in the air, even though I haven't seen it yet. I appreciate that post this morning, where you are trying to bring us back together, and focus on the low-price of Campbell. The reason I wrote that your initial post was "dismissive and negative" was because you made strong statement about Campbell's earnings potential. You statement sounded like it was a sure thing, an experienced observation. It was like you were laughing at Campbell. “They couldn’t possibly have the gold production to achieve that level of earnings”. You were mocking. But you completely overlooked the fact that Campbell is a Copper producer, and earns more money from copper than gold. And Campbell’s gold production at Copper Rand will have a higher profit margin than your 25%. Their gold production is a byproduct. Gold production costs are near zero, at that flagship mine. You wrote that first post without spending more than 1 minute looking at the company. It say's "Copper" on every report the company releases. We all make mistakes. How many people will be joining us for that round of virtual Beers or Single Malts that I have proposed?