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: Postman who wrote (64898)	4/23/2009 4:54:31 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78407

A junior that is successful in exploration is still the best bang for the buck I have seen in the markets I see you are back on the team and developing your swing. Go tell all the people what you have learned. Go ahead. And don't be shy about it either. A lot of them are still investing in railroad stocks and banks as if Monopoly was reality. EC<:-}

To: Postman who wrote (64898)	4/23/2009 5:30:46 AM
From: E. Charters	1 Recommendation Respond to of 78407

then someone notices they have something and comes along and tries to sue them or steal it- or we can just leave that to the government since they are the experts at it ----- You are getting the idea. Now you know why you ordinarily shouldn't vote liberal or democrat. People who talk nice and smooth are the biggest thieves. Confidence men and tricksters who get thrown out of the gang go into government work. Whenever I talk to someone and I notice that they don't miss a beat, never stumble in conversation, never disagree, and they make me feel better just talking to them, my spidey senses are alerted. The reason for this smoothness, is that they are only doing one thing. Stroking. To do that you don't actually have to stick to principle, remember a fact, or argue a point you believe in. You just pad with smarm, praise, narcotic blow.. and get the confidence. Sales 101. When the hook is in, you pull with all your might.. and run when the wallet is yours. Nobody I ever met that was real believed in everything I said or agreed with me all the time. Nobody is 100% praise. If they are they should never ever be trusted. A Politicians tells you 100% what you want to hear and does 100% what his real friends pay him to do, -- what he believes will get the most money for his pet projects, or get him the vote from his board of directors -- the money machine that got him in office in the first place. A healthy dose of cynic liver oil will protect you from investing in BC or most Western provinces. Right now Manitoba and Saskatchewan look good. So does New Brunswick and Quebec. It could change. I would say Ontario, but until we turn the government around Ontario is dangerous, except in a few locations where they already have mines. Too long a development path right now in Canada in general. That goes for most US states too. Even Nevada. 5 years to get a mine started. Investors don't have that long to live. All this environment stuff with mines is really crap. They don't know anything now they did not know by 1935. Rules for tailings dams, effluent handling etc.. the technology, hydroxide precipitation - had matured by then. It is a chemical reality that other than dilution there is not much else you can do. It is a chemical reality that every solute has a KsP so you will never take ALL dissolved substances out of a solvent. No matter what you do. Except by dialysis or the rather new science of carbon gel electro-precipitation out of non-electrolytes. (Nobody seems to have that working yet or water filters that did that would be on the shelves everywhere ..) Dalton, Laviosier and Fourier knew that. Bohr and Mosely, Kelvin did not add much. What the government wants mining companies to do is impossible. What they will let a fire extinguisher company (bromides), metal plating (cyanide) oil refinery, plastics or insecticide manufacturer do (dioxins, furans, PCBs, chlorinated hydrocarbons), and what they will let a mine do are two different things. (Just as securities regs for high tech and manufacturing are separate and less stringent than mining) Government law concerning mining and the environment is the essence of hypocrisy. I have a book on engineering considerations for construction of tailings dams. You can build a tailings dam or pond to perfection by reading this book and applying the principles. Don't have to change a thing to meet regs today. It's first printing was 1937. The last printing was 1955. It is current. CIM rules on reporting assays for mines and exploration projects was more or less static around 1954. You could report from that reg and not make a mistake by 2009 43-101 regs. (Ok disclaimer law, and QP naming is new.. but in fact, except for the language, most NR's were the same in substance since that time..) All they did to make the 43-101 regs was adopt the current CIM guidelines. Material fact being reportable rather than material change was slowly adopted over the past 18 years. Material change was always debatable since 1967. It is really what a bunch of prosecuting lawyers at the SEC say it is, rather than what you might think. If a producer finds a mine is is material change? Not really, but the standard is to report it. Besides it's good publicity. A drill hole is usually not material change, and it may be fact, but what really is its materiality? But try not reporting it. It is debatable whether or not is is fact that it is material. i.e. does it matter to the company's bottom line/stock price. EC<:-}