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 : ECHARTERS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Matt C. Austin who wrote (1454)	11/10/1997 6:10:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3744

Ask Coggins, the idiot ran 4 SFA on their dirt in 1994 and he (Coggins) proclaimed fraud. His DD is a little better than yours - but Not Much. Matt: Good point. Coggins' DD was ridiculously bad when he proclaimed scam (until the judge shut him up). Charters is relying on hearsay from Coggins and Lumbert, which is even worse. Of course Charters also relied on hearsay (rather than reading the Kilborn Report), or lied, when he told his subscribers, "Bre-X has an orebody." There is a consistent pattern of lazy (at best), or dishonest, (at worst) DD with Charters, and he is not fooling anybody any more.

To: Matt C. Austin who wrote (1454)	11/10/1997 6:23:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 3744

Answer the question. Not because I demand it. The question demands an answer. Otherwise it is an orphan of doubt at the soup kitchen of despair. So please sir. How do you/we/I/anyone, know that ordinary fire assay would not find all the platinum that they are presently finding? And if it does then why not use that? ------------------------------------------------- If I were a shareholder I would demand an audit to prove that the method were indeed special. -------------------------------------------------