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 : Solv Ex (SOLVD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Coakley who wrote (5098)	11/20/1997 9:54:00 PM
From: WTMHouston	Respond to of 6735

Found it interesting that the Ft. M. article called JR the "former Solv-Ex president John Rendall"? Is he truly "former"? When did this happen? (if it did happen)..... Maybe now that Solv-Ex is getting some money, they will be able to file some audited financials before too much longer... BTW, what is the latest word on the Conv. Debentures? Are they being converted? Are they still being converted at $33/share: what a way to kill a balance sheet, get ~$2M in stock for a ~$33 million debt...now that's a real trading loss! Finally, MA got mentioned this a.m. on CNBC...apparently he is going after ZONA now (if I recall correctly)....CNBC said something to the effect that they were surprised that no one had sued him yet to shut him up and that some of his releases were "extreme"...although they suggested that a couple of his current targets were litigious enough to do it. I figure that some of ya'll will be glad to hear that last part...:) Just wondering Troy

To: David Coakley who wrote (5098)	11/21/1997 4:54:00 PM
From: Gary L Schultz	Respond to of 6735

David, Thanks for the wonderful response. Nothing less was expected from you. I respect your opinions - however, I disagree with them. From The Press Release: Subject to certain conditions, including the extension of the oilsand leases by the Government of Alberta, Koch is planning to move forward with the bitumen extraction technology that maximizes the resource potential of the mining site, and optimizes the benefits of the project for everyone involved, including communities, employees, contractors and other stakeholders. These planes will encompass all assessment of Solv-Ex's and Geopetrol's technologies among others and will provide Solv-Ex the opportunity to develop their mineral extraction technology separate from bitumen operations. From reading this, I see no concrete statment from Koch that they will adopts the SOLV process. I merely states that the SOLV process will be "assessed" - the article also mentions that Geopetrol's method will be looked at. Bottom line is that Koch will adopt the method that maximizes production vs environmental concerns. That doesn't necessarily mean SOLV. Yes, SOLV will be allowed to play in the tailings as KOCH makes a fortune off the leases. I will agree that this deal is better than the fate SOLV faced before the so called "bailout" - more like a garage sale IMO. However, any new investors should be aware that this deal means NOTHING with regards to the future stock price of SOLV. I would remind all readers of this board that KOCH bought assests of SOLV - Not a tender offer for the stock. As such, the common shareholder gets NADA from this deal. Bettino: I liked the comments in your post up to the last paragraph. I'm still wishing someone would attack me on the facts - vs personal attacks and inuendo. Regards, Gary Gary

To: David Coakley who wrote (5098)	11/26/1997 5:20:00 PM
From: Mama Bear	Respond to of 6735

>>>While you're at it go on and tell us how right you and Asensio were aboutSolv-Ex the entire time and how the fact that the short sellers who had (and possibly still have) millions of shares sold short, many naked, had nothing to do with Solv-Ex's troubles.<<< I can't believe that you still cling to the fantasy that Asensio had something to do with Solv Ex going under. I don't believe that Mr Asensio had anything to do with SOLVQ not having a penny of revenue for 18 years. I don't think Mr Asensio forced Mr Rendall to lie to the shareholders time and time again. Was it because Rendall and company couldn't go offshore and dilute the shareholders equity again? Please explain your position, as I just don't understand. perhaps if you convince me, I'll donate the profits from my short to charity. I'm serious, Dave. See you at .02, Barb