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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JACK R. SMITH JR. who wrote (4527)	12/19/1997 9:52:00 PM
From: francis terry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Jack You are rite of cource, and we have so much negetive responses that I feel oblidged to be postive in this note. This is the first time that a sizable hunk of gold or p. has been refinned by a commercial refiner, now that deserves something better than it should have been more. We have people that does not really have any idea of what is required to get gold particiles out of desert sand., and you are expected to believe every word that they say. A little education in miming should help some. I do not expect to be selling anyof my shares anytime soon. This is a life time oportunity, for whomever understands and can take a few hard knocks or waiting for the big pay day to arrive. If I said I was buying some Monday that is hype, no place for it here. You know about risk against reward . Yes this is a gamble, but I have been doing that all of my life. Everheard of nu-Dawn in Costa Rica, they have gold but it aint leaving the country. I droped a few sheckles on that one. GPGI i am still in it for the long hold, till they get the blooming stuff. I like my chance. Can I dare tell you a stock symbol without being asked to leave this thread, I thought we were trying to buy something that could go up, and make a profit. Take a chance go for it, Assy looked pretty fair on the chart. Being new to the threads- no one has read me the rules, I notice that the ones that holler the most are the verry ones that are guilty as sin. Hyping and dumping is in it is out depends on who is the hyper./ I bet I get some response , who cares, Francis Terry

To: JACK R. SMITH JR. who wrote (4527)	12/20/1997 12:31:00 PM
From: Gary S	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 14226

Jack, A few comments on your post #4527: In my opinion, it will take cash receipts greater than those announced today to move the stock significantly. Progress is progress, however. Procedures will be revised and processes fine tuned and greater returns will be had. I have no doubt of this. You have hit the nail on the head. In fact, some of these procedures and processes have been fine tuned since we sent that 50 ounce batch to Engelhard. There was severe dissapointment when there was no refined metal shown at the meeting in Nevada, and the announcement of smaller than expected returns from Engelhart West was also disappointing. Both can be viewed as good progress, they just did not meet expectations. Other than what Jeff Williams reported about the meeting in Nevada, we don't know what happened (i.e. different agendas, etc.) or what was supposed to happen. So, I won't even attempt to address our expectation levels vs. those of the attendees for that meeting. However, I will question your "smaller than expected returns" comment. What exactly were you expecting? Here are my calculations: Assumptions: 1) The ratio of precious metals in the semi-refined metal we sent to Engelhard is the same as we had for the sludge we sent to Sabin (see Sept. 15 update). 2) Since I don't know what prices Engelhard used, I'll use the closing bid prices from yesterday (see kitco.com. Dec.19 Ratio Price $/oz ----------------------- Silver 0.301 6.07 1.83 Gold 0.218 289.45 63.10 Platinum 0.187 355.75 66.53 Palladium 0.192 184.75 35.47 Rhodium 0.103 320.00 32.96 ----------------------- 1.001 199.89 So, the THEORETICAL maximum we should have expected to receive for our semi-refined metal was: 50 oz * 199.89/oz = $9,994.50. There are two very good reasons why we didn't get paid that amount. First, it assumes that our metal contained 100% precious metals. That's simply not the case. It would have contained some amount of impurities. Your guess is as good as mine what that number would be, but I wouldn't be shocked if it were 20-30%. Also, there's no way that we would get full value of the metals for such a small quantity. The spot values are based on large quantities. Mike Wendell posted a message on his "New Age" thread which stated that "Precious metals are marketed in 1000 ounce minimums for favorable treatment." (Dec. 15). It's very much like currency exchange (see what rate you get when converting $100 vs. $100,000) or the buying and selling of less than a board lot of shares (often, you'll pay more when buying and receive less when selling). I'm not sure what your expectations were for this batch of metal but I can say that a $5,000 gross value is not a disappointment for me. Anybody who was expecting 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars was simply being unrealistic. We should NOT focus on the amount of money we received. The bottom line here is that we put the metal on the table and a major refinery was able to deal with it. The process works. Now, we just have to choose the best method and ramp up production accordingly. Do we send semi-refined metal to Engelhard? Do we send anode bars to Friendship? Do we send sludge to Sabin? Dennis DeNoble made a reference to two other refiners. Perhaps one of those will figure into the equation. Maybe we'll end up using more than one refinery. In my opinion, the positives outweigh the negatives. We're on the right track, although we're moving slower than we'd like. Then again, didn't the tortoise win the race? :)