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 : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (6234)	12/3/1997 7:34:00 PM
From: Jan A. Van Hummel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Larry, I am not familiar with the IPM/Behre Dolbear situation. However, I am not concerned with what is being claimed by Naxos, IPM or anyone, only with what is determined independently be a reputable 3rd party like Ledoux on basis of COC samples. If I read your message correctly Behre Dolbear verified IPM's findings. If so, that is not good enough. If you use the same sample and distribute it to three or four assayers their findings will be pretty much in line, so one is verifying in essence the other. Important is that the samples are drawn and prepared in a proper fashion (I am not familiar how this is done for PM bearing deposits, but am sure there are generally accepted standard procedures). This should be done without any involvement of interested parties. Samples thus drawn and prepared should be assayed for their PM contents, again, without any involvement of interested parties. It is my understanding that Naxos has painstakingly worked at safeguarding the integrity of the COC process. The samples then should be representative and the findings should be accurate. Did IPM follow these procedures? BTW If not mistaken, the IPM results were not that bad, but just not good enough to be economically viable, especially given the current depressed gold market. JMHO Jan