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: Lew Green who wrote (26352)	11/15/1997 12:14:00 AM
From: barb loucks	Respond to of 35569

Well...pretty much what I expected, actually (although not what I'd dreamed of.) I can certainly understand and sympathize with some posters' disappointment. Looks like it may be a long and rocky journey to the moon. But, we are a small step closer to a mine... I think one really has to be nimble in the market these days. It is very difficult to be long-term with such uncertainty in the gold and general markets...I have much to learn. Best to all. Barb

To: Lew Green who wrote (26352)	11/15/1997 12:15:00 AM
From: Eric Tai	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Lew, Brad, Kim, I tend to agree with Lew that the news release talked about a different kind of financing which is not the Reg S type. The typical Reg S financing is to allow the convertible debenture holders to convert at a DISCOUNT (say 15%) to the market value. Then the convertible bond holders can keep converting and selling his stocks at market to lock in the discount and cause the stock to crash. But in this case, the news release is talking about a 125% of market value. Though I don't know about the details or strings attached to such kind of deals now, it is not Reg S.

To: Lew Green who wrote (26352)	11/15/1997 12:25:00 AM
From: Brander	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 35569

Lew, I strongly disagree with your opinion that financing is the brightest part of the release. Also, you tend to exagerate extremely what I said, even to the point of attributing other people's statements to mine. Anyway, there is almost always something wrong with "reg" Reg S. Is is almost always a last resort type of financing, and it always dilutes, and causes downward pressure on the stock price, by its nature. Reg S is not desinged to protect the investor. Most investors run from Reg S, which you should know. It is impossible to tell just exactly what the form of the financing is, as, per Zev's post, there are alot of new financing tools out there for companies in trouble, but none of them are good for the short run stock price. The financing IPM announced today is certainly of this nature, and it is not a positive. Looking at it as a bight spot is not realistic, and only falsely increases expectations, which is not good for the stock in the long term. Brad

To: Lew Green who wrote (26352)	11/15/1997 2:44:00 PM
From: kimberley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Lew, Sure you weren't putting a few down like the rest of us?<vbg> <<Looks to me like "Trader Kim" got caught long and is having to make lemmonade out of todays lemmons -- but I will also admit she's doing a great job -- most of her points are logicical and on the mark IMO. >> Kuddos to you... must of taken a lot to say Kim was right on anything. To set the record straight, though... Kim didn't get 'caught'... I bet x amount of money on a good report, bought those shares Wednesday morning, and wrote it off. did the same with Bre-x options. I *was caught off guard by the numbers, however. I at least expected an improvement over the .04, but such is life. I have to disagree with your take on the financing... it's really too premature to say it's positive or negative. If you can get the details, I wish you'd make them public so we can all make our own decisions on it. Perhaps it is favorable, but until more details, the jury is still out, at least for me. best, kim