SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Lew Green who wrote (24247)11/4/1997 8:29:00 AM
From: Dave Bissett  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 35569
 
Lew - I'm a little confused by this statement...<<One metalurgist told me there are "concentrate fire assays" well known at many labs>> I was under the impression that whatever lab is doing the work would use the assay developed/specified by IPM over the past several months and not one of their own. Please clarify. Thanks.

Dave



To: Lew Green who wrote (24247)11/4/1997 9:18:00 AM
From: Proton  Respond to of 35569
 
Re: Your Message 4 Nov

Thanks for a genuinely soothing explanation for lab delays. We are apt to forget we aren't the only patrons in the restaurant.

IPM finally got the message delivered voceriferously here by many shareholders for months, that if dates of things were in hands totally out of their control, they shouldn't give dates, hard or expected. Period. Better to leave it open-ended than be late.

I was of this opinion then, and am quite comfortable with it now. I was on the verge of selling my IPM (not "scaling back", dumping) when they came out with the press release regarding completion of the verification activities. That was enough to convince me to stick with the position. It was one of the few milestone reports we received in 1997, the lack of which caused my discontent.

In this case, I am quite pleased that I may have received what I wished for.

Pý (not crabbing about IPM IR as of late, but not unwilling to)