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: KVASIR who wrote (26075)	11/14/1997 1:57:00 PM
From: Anne Lamb	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

What the release contains as far as good or bad would have nothing to do directly with the comment that the lawyers are checking it closely..Lew told you what they said.. all your assumptions and speculations are a bit outta control..all we can do is wait and see..just relax

To: KVASIR who wrote (26075)	11/14/1997 4:20:00 PM
From: Lew Green	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 35569

<< If the news is positive & verifies-doesn't that relieve the necessity for "the lawyers being meticulous"?>> No. That is not sound logic IMO, and I could be wrong but you sound like you are seeing ghosts in the shadows -- and perhaps should seek a better comfort level with your position -- though it is late. IPM has been under a deluge of scrutiny, has litigation with AZ, new players have become involved, Bateman is a _HUGE_ conglomerate, the exchanges (esp. CDN) have been persnickety with them in the past, Coggins and his crowd are haranging the SEC to investigate us... So in light of all this, I read nothing negative into them being meticulous and careful. Further, this release might be very complex... _think_ about it... The Runyon "deadline" passed so there could be "news" in that area and it may be contractural. Then we have finanancing -- IPM is due for a PP, and everyone here has been speculating on that for some time -- that could be in any given PR. John Yellich _left_ IPM for MGAU yesterday, which leads me to speculate we may have personel additions/restructuring at IPM (could be very bullish, depending). And all this time IPM has been working for months now on an "assay" track along with the "recovery" track as part of the verification program. Reporting on the former could be quite complex as I've posted before, and could involve lab clearances. Lotta details could be involved. Lew Green PS... I am purely speculating -- I have no factual knowlege of what topic(s) will be in the PR !!! I have only been assured by IPM (as have many others and this thread) that there will definately be lab results from the COC recovery work per the last PR -- but logic dictates there could be plenty more.