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 : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (24077)	11/2/1997 6:50:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35569

I'm not. Why in the world would they reply to you?

To: E. Charters who wrote (24077)	11/2/1997 7:05:00 PM
From: go4it	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35569

<<The samples you show in that table were never approved of by Behre Dohlbear. A different group of samples were approved by Behre Dohlebear with a different grade..according to IPM.>> That is correct sir at least for the time being. I hope everyone was clear on that. The point I was eluding to was the fact that BD performed a due diligence on the property and they know what the company was putting out in a news release and there was absolutely no possible way that IPM could extract those kinds of numbers then I believe they would have dropped IPM as a client quicker than that press release would have hit the media. Of course BD wouldn't comment on one of their clients.