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: Larry Brubaker who wrote (26834)	11/16/1997 7:47:00 PM
From: GlobalMarine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Thanks, Larry. Indeed, outsourcing may not work either, but at least you're accessing the widest talent pool possible. If you ultimately fail, at least you've left no stone unturned. There is one advantage to in-house R&D...if you come up with an economic recovery method, you don't have to issue any shares to get the rights to it. Regards, Rand

To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (26834)	11/16/1997 7:52:00 PM
From: Bruce McGaughey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Welcome Rand. You do have a good point and you presented it very well, I might add. But, hindsight is 20-20, as we all know. Read the IPM PR of 12-19-96. IPM thought they had discovered the Holy Grail of recoveries back then. No need for outsiders. Mentzer did it. He cracked the code. The Purdue boy saved the company. I guess he didn't, now that we look back. Apparently, it fell apart in March when the stock hit it's peak and Shorty jumped in. This is evidenced by Matt's post, earlier. Maybe that's when IPM should have gone elsewhere for a new process. Apparently, they kept trying to tweak the old process at Friendship and couldn't get consistent reads. (We were told scale-up was going well, though). Bateman began in August and has just given us the first of, hopefully, many good PRs to release. Yeah, I wish Bateman had been there from the beginning but things looked so good a year ago !!! (Some of the above are assumptions...that may not be true. Can anyone correct me if I've made a mistake ??)