To: Supervalue who wrote (1949 ) 12/10/1997 1:44:00 PM From: Feline Read Replies (2) | Respond to
I'm not suggesting this is a fraud. I'm speculating that the true width may be 1/3rd of the publishd interval based on certain assumptions of mine. And, by just doing that it may be worse than the truth, just more disinformation. My point is that the Company could avoid all the suspicion and speculation by publishing a drill map that shows the relative position of all drill holes and the angle, intervals and azimuths that they were drilled at. The security regulators are very lax on this point and I believe that there should be some basic reporting standards that companies who are conducting drill programs MUST follow. This would level the playing field a bit and it would help us decide what to do. Afterall, the company insiders have this information and know its significance. If they and the underwriters always get (the) price advantage why not share the information on a timely basis. The public, does, afterall provide the cash to do the drilling. As you've seen, the regulators have asked some companies to defend certain "resource" calculations and in many cases the company had to make retractions. But this isn't enough as very few programs ever get to the resource point. The reporting standards are appalling and the companies won't change unless forced to do so. For me, I don't buy any exploration stock unless I get a drill grid and other hole information. Without this information you may as well ask to be executed. No blindfold. Period. Everybody on all these threads have this in common-the need for timely information that allows the exercise of speculative judgement. (tempered with personal greed, of course) The complaint has to be to the regulators to raise the level of reporting standards. Let's start bothering the VSE and see what happens. I'll see if I can find an email address for them, Mr. Johnson, I think.
