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: Kurt R. who wrote (7801)	1/4/1998 1:07:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Hi Kurt Yes the mechanism being discussed was the revaluation of reserves, both gold an currencies but gold being the biggest number. And the intention was to get a dividend from the Buba of 10 bln Dmk. Also as I recall eventially this accounting will take place in the the normal course of business. The Bundesbank's main objection was to the speeding up of the process with the political intent of generating an additional 10 bln Dmk to pretty up the balance sheet prior to EMU. You are probably right that there was no public discussion of gold sales. As part of my business we maintain very close contacts with central banks and several very well placed political economists. We were aware of some discussions between Buba and the Ministry regarding gold sales but this may not have been public. As Buba was very upset over the incident the exchange over gold may have been an effort to smoke out Waigel's intentions in this regard. In any case the gold sales aren't happening soon but I am suspicious to see what happens with the more politcized EMI. As you can may have gathered I am very skeptical of EMU. From your vantage point in Berlin what do you think German public opinion on EMU is at the moment. E-mail me if you wish so we don't bore the rest of the thread. H_Volquardsen@aigtc.com Henry

To: Kurt R. who wrote (7801)	1/6/1998 10:50:00 AM
From: Kurt R.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20681

Hello Folks, today is an important day for Naxos. As per the 10-9-97 news release, today is the day Naxos will "pay another US$250,000 plus 2 million restricted shares to earn permanent rights to use the Johnson-Lett assaying methodology." I will take this landmark day as an opportunity to ask Naxos representatives a number of questions. Your prompt reply will be greatly appreciated. 1. Why would it take Ledoux so long to retest to certify? What are they holding back? Surely Ledoux must be familiar with the process as they already successfully applied the J/L ore preparation method and released some numbers. 2. (I asked this one before) What is the scope of the "analyzing and assessing" currently underway at Ledoux? To be more specific, I understand that Ledoux was provided the necessary equipment and detailed instructions as to how this method works. If this is the case, could someone from Naxos (or Ledoux) please clarify how it can possibly take a reputable assaying lab so long to reproduce a "cookbook approach." Dr. Johnson will be paid a fortune for this assaying/recovery method. If this process is sooo difficult to reproduce and such a huge challenge for a world renown lab, maybe it isn't worth that much? 3. In a previous post, Mr. Brasington stated that Naxos requested that Ledoux certify the numbers by today. When has Ledoux promised delivery of the results? Has Ledoux committed to anything other than accepting payments from Naxos? Did Naxos set a deadline? 4. When can we expect data from the other two labs? Has management negotiated suitable contracts with the additional labs so that Naxos, and not the lab controls the information flow? I am asking the latter question because it has been said that Naxos has actually obtained two reports form Ledoux, but is not allowed to release the numbers. Any truth to that? These are just a few questions that come to mind. Again, a prompt reply by Naxos would be highly appreciated. Kurt