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: Lonnie who wrote (7187)	12/12/1997 11:57:00 PM
From: Alan Vennix	Respond to of 20681

Lonnie, I've been following (and invested in various of these companies) for over 2 years now, and while I'm certainly not the Naxos expert, I'll take a crack at some of your questions. (1)B-D drilled 5 wells and supplied COC samples to Ledoux. These are the first 3 of many, many samples that will have to be processed. (2) My guess is that they took the samples at 100' intervals to get a feel for gold content vs depth, although I don't know how/why they started at 135'. (3)These were COC results - Ledoux will repeat on additional COC samples and then "certify", whatever that entails. (4)/(5)Patents are in the process of being prepared, some may have been filed but I don't know that for a fact. (6) I assume Mr. Lett is a busy man, and contrary to what Michael Grasso believes, I doubt he reads this thread regularly. I assume/hope he has more important things to do. (7) Have no idea - maybe you should ask Naxos, although I doubt that they have a frim schedule in mind either. If it works smoothly I don't know why they wouldn't continue to process ore from various areas of FL. Hope that helps and, please, others jump in with responses to Lonnies questions. Alan

To: Lonnie who wrote (7187)	12/12/1997 11:58:00 PM
From: sh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Has this thread gone to sleep? I'm sure we have some experts, semi-experts or just plain knowledgeable people that can answer some of the questions raised by a few posters. I for one, whose been in this stock for a while now, am at a bit of a loss regarding the difference between an assay and a recovery process. I was under the impression that an assay is simply a test, a detection device that is akin to an x-ray looking for kidney stones. Although you can see the stones, you cann't extract them with your x-ray. If I'm wrong, I would appreciate someone educating me on this process. Would hate to have to consult the rambling technician E. Charters on this simple little matter. I know the latest release only talks about assay results but does anyone have any information, assuming my presumption about the difference between an assay and a recovery process is correct, as to whether Ledoux also recovered the gold in the tested ore? To our newcomer, who said there was a question about COC? Ledoux simply wants to re-test the material to confirm the process works consistently. But then again, if they also recovered gold through the process, then there may be a question about COC or some type of contamination if the process needed to be redone. I think I'm now raising even more questions so I'll leave this one alone. We certainly have been told by the company that the patent on the Johnson process is pending so that should answer your question. I don't understand your next question about the #. Are you asking about the patent number? If so, there is none at this point since the patent is pending. Maybe others can tackle your other questions and enlighten us further on the first one I took a jab at. By the way, how does one get italics/highlighting on these SI posts? Regards, sh P.S.: I had to edit this a couple of times before our good friend Mr. Meetmer(sp?) comes after me again for my bad spelling.

To: Lonnie who wrote (7187)	12/13/1997 12:01:00 AM
From: Brian Hutcheson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Lonnie , re odd that the grades are exactly 100' apart. Unless there are 3 bands of material exactly 100' apart in 5 ' sections (that would be an unbelievable situation), those sections were obviously selected intentionally from the drill core to obtain a broad cross-section of the orebody . According to information I have received from parties involved in that area who have personal knowledge of FL and Tecopa areas the playas are homogenius (the PGMs are disseminated evenly throughout the playa). Brian PS my understanding is that these numbers are proven , since Ledoux gave permission to release them . Certification would appear to involve double and triple crosschecking the results which is understandable given the almost unbelievable figures .

To: Lonnie who wrote (7187)	12/13/1997 12:04:00 AM
From: knight	Respond to of 20681

Lonnie, looks like Henry is out of the building right now, he's got the goods on naxos and I'm sure he'll take the time to address your concerns. I've got some nagging doubts about what is transpiring with the Johnson Methodology mumbo-jumbo. On one hand, you have to give the company credit for its' tenacity in pursuing the FL project but on the other hand, being able to pull rabbits out of a hat so to speak, with this new assay preparation is a little mystifying to me. There's a lot of money in this deal with Johnson- Lett based on patent pending secretive procedures. I dunno, keep asking those questions before investing though. At the $7 to $8 dollar level, its pretty risky stuff. In these depressed markets, there are a lot of conventional junior and even senior miners that'll give you more bang for the buck. Just my opinion of course. knight

To: Lonnie who wrote (7187)	12/13/1997 7:40:00 AM
From: Jerry in Omaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Mr. Lonnie; Welcome to our thread and do pursue your questions until you are satisfied with our answers. We think you'll discover that Naxos has been un-fairly maligned in the past and present - but not in the future. Wait and see. You posted: "As an outsider looking in, this company doesn't go out of its' way to encourage new investment." I took particular interest in the above un-solicited comment from you. You are correct, it is very difficult to negotiate a purchase path to Naxos. To me this is a direct and powerful refutation of all who would call this a "hyped" stock which, no doubt if true, widely would be available. That certainly is not the case with Naxos stock. Mr. Reschner also asked, "Has any one of you received phone calls offering you a 'once in a life time deal, but you must act now?'" This also has not happened and goes toward the conclusion that this company or its stock is not being "hyped." As our recent results attest, we're just not going to need any hyping; the reality of the content of Franklin Lake and the Johnson Process is stunning enough. Jerard P