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: Carlo who wrote (7776)	1/3/1998 11:49:00 AM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

OFF TOPIC: which means a Naxos comment. Did anyone else catch the press on the Canadian gold companies and the gold industry in general over the past week? Some very interesting facts were pointed out. 1) 16% of Canadian exports are represented by mining. Kind of makes sense why the ASE was so anxious to be sure Naxos didn't make it. 2) Worldwide, gold companies are consolidating and the prime target is properties or entities with low gold production costs. The lowest mentioned in the WSJ article was a property in Peru with per ounce costs of $97. There was so much more mentioned about gold it doesn't make sense to retype the article here but the second point above makes for a very exciting eventuality for Naxos. When, not if, Naxos gets certification on the 3 opt and ANY other metal, the costs per ounce will start at $33 and drop from there with every ounce of metal per ton found to be recoverable. What do you suppose would be the interest level of ANY of the large gold producers in a property which could produce PROFITABLY at $100 gold, even $50 per ounce? My opinion, and it is my opinion only, not heresay or rumour, I would say that once we have certification, interest levels are going to rise dramatically from a number of producers. Then, when recovery is proven for the real numbers (actual recoverable metals in total) then it would be gross mismanagement for any metals producers NOT to take a very close look at Naxos and put together some very serious offers. The article was very clear that low cost production was the PRIME interest. Just some thoughts here. I welcome any comments. Regards, Tom F. P.S. HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE! I THINK THIS WILL BE THE YEAR FOR NAXOS!!!

To: Carlo who wrote (7776)	1/3/1998 11:58:00 AM
From: knight	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Assay labs seem to have their own schedule. Investors in Naxos are as anxious for results as in any play. I suggest to all that Naxos drops the additional labs and proceed with the pilot plant test. Forget about trying to replicate one labs' results with anothers' (lab). You're beating your head against a brick wall; a complete waste of time and effort. The plant is paid for, put some freakin' dirt in, max the output, and see if there is some recoverable pm's. I would suggest that the pilot test run be monitored by a third party or nobody is going to believe the results if they are good anyway. Now to get back on subject, has the US Postal Service put out any commemorative football stamps? knight