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: francis terry who wrote (4562)	12/26/1997 2:25:00 PM
From: Scott Wheeler	Respond to of 14226

<<< Greed keeps most good things from becoming a reality >>> My point was that this greed may not be smart self-interest, but instead short-sighted and originating from tired old ways of thinking about success and competition. Greed itself {Adam Smith, Milton Friedman] can still be OK, even desireable, but could still coincide with cooperative information-sharing for mutual benefit. Unreflected beliefs in "if so-and-so wins, I must be losing" are what I'm calling into question. And to answer Zeev - yes I agree that the ore bodies are probably very dissimilar, but don't forget in the case of GPGI the refining issue seems to have bottlenecked at the latter stages of refining, not the early ones - this makes me think everyone will face this step - maybe mother ores were different, but I suspect the differences in the refining steps gradually diminish as the production materials begin to converge towards the refined product. Maybe my ore was very different from yours at the beginning, but since we are both heading towards pure gold or pure platinum, you can bet that our problems will become more and more similar as we go through our individual refining steps. At some point our extraction issues begin to resemble each other. Perhaps two or three DDs could afford what one alone could not. For someone such as yourself with a prodigious background in the physics of ceramics/silicates/metals, you might benefit personally from such strategic alliances and pooled resources (e.g., wasn't coming to terms one of the obstacles to your involvement?). Strategic alliances are nothing new, by the way, and can even include competition within their design (e.g., juniors vs. large producers, which I suspect may emerge as an issue if the DDs can extract profitably and metals prices remain distressed)....SW

To: francis terry who wrote (4562)	12/26/1997 6:21:00 PM
From: Ron Wilkinson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Francis, I agree that their best chance is a single refinery to service all the dirts but don't give even that much chance. The main reason is that these guys are inventors and they are essentially a one product company (precious metals). If they invent the right process/es they will live and prosper for their shareholders and they don't care about the other guy. Where I have seen collaboration work in the past was on one aspect of an industry problem where no participant's existence depended on the outcome. That is not the case with the dirts (excluding those which have other subsidaries). If you believed that your research was one to three years ahead of the other guys, how would you feel about giving that info to them (for nothing)? And these problems don't even include the individual personalities involved. I would be inclined to sell if they actually formed such a group because then I would know without a doubt that none of them have a clue how to get the metal out. Regards, Ron