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 (7822)	1/6/1998 12:25:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20681

Kurt, The Johnson-Lett process is not a "cookbook approach". It is a new technology and Ledoux needs to take the time to analyze the process. The retest for certification has been delayed because of a combination of the holidays and equipment problems. It has already been posted here that the balls from the attriter were damaged and need to be replaced. There are only two manufacturers and Ledoux took care of this so that there would be no questions. Henry

To: Kurt R. who wrote (7822)	1/6/1998 2:54:00 PM
From: william allen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

Kurt, I agree with your posting that this should be a landmark day and if not,we should have been advised by Kim to expect a delay and the reason for it. It should not be the "balls", as stated, they should be for the bulk testing. We have seen the price fall for the PP, now should we except another decline when important news dates pass with out any word. Maybe one of the "Scores" shareholders can put some light on the situation, they seem not to be worried. But then again what should you expect, when those that know won't say and those who announce things are told not to post rumors. This should be a big day for J/L and the shareholders and if not we deserve to be told why. Rgds, Bill

To: Kurt R. who wrote (7822)	1/7/1998
From: Kim W. Brasington	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20681

Kurt: Greetings to you. I came in from work, and will attempt to answer the questions that you posed to me. Before I do, I would like to emphasize several points/questions that in my mind are worthy of note. 1. Ledoux continues testing. The converse of that would be Ledoux ISN'T testing. 2. Others labs will soon be coming on line. 3. Do you or I have the same concept of thoroughness as Ledoux would demand? 4. Are we Ledoux's only customers? Now, in answer to your questions: I don't know all of the parameters of Ledoux's lengthy analysis of the Franklin Lake material. Thoroughness is no doubt a "must" for them to maintain their stock in trade - their reputation. The novelty of the Johnson/Lett process no doubt demands greater scrutiny than a few simple assays. Familiarity with the process is not the same as building up a base of data. It is a fact that labs are sometimes challenged. Run of the mill assays are rarely challenged - not so innovative processes. Analysis of a process - particularly a new one demands that each step be looked and an explanation be advanced about what is going on. Ledoux was not asked to "copycat" the Johnson/Lett process, but to sift it finely. Yes, you are correct Kurt - Naxos did ask Ledoux to give us an answer by today. I also added that an extension was possible with the consent of both parties to the agreement. I talked with management and they informed me that an extension has been agreed to by both parties. Naxos has paid Ledoux, and yes, they agreed to provide us with results. Insofar as the other labs are concerned - they will be forthcoming soon. Suitable contracts have been negotiated with them. I personally am unaware of any Ledoux numbers that have not been reported. Now - I would like to make some closure comments. Multiple labs are a decided positive in my mind and indicative of growing fundamental strength of this company. Labs routinely turn down companies that they don't want to work with - this is a fact of the mining community. You will rarely see junior precious metals companies that have COC and multiple labs. These steps are to provide a strong informational basis for the Johnson/Lett process that will allow us to give a preponderance of evidence to anyone that would be interested in investing in Naxos. R&D can be frustrating and it can run on a skewed timetable of its' own. What every investor needs to decide is if long delays and overriden deadlines are worth the potential reward that could possibly be derived from sticking with it. As you know "mein freund" there can be a bit of "angst" inherit in R&D companies :o) Best Wishes Kurt; Kim W.