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 : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (29992)	1/19/1998 6:30:00 PM
From: Joe Hartenbower	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

OH... Gerald is answering your mail. Gerald: >> And what do you know that makes your ass-u-mption that this was a good thing different? This company has done nothing to deserve the benefit of the doubt. << Gerald, you don't understand and that hurts. I am not assuming. I just think that there are enough possibilities that it is unfar for people to take such vindictive and negatigive shots. >> So far your defense of this cash syphoning is: 1) We don't know why they did it so it must be good. << Wrong - could be good. >> 2) They're going to make so much off the interest-free "loan" later converted to stock that they can finance their operations with it. << Wrong - Said what if... >> 3) The money funnled to the Nabimian directors will allow them to invest in IPM. << Wrong, said what if... >> 4) It doesn't matter because $1,000,000 is insignificant compared to the billions in the ground that they can't extract yet and may never be able to if they don't have money to spend to develop an extraction process. << Gerald. You are not playing fair. That's not what I said. See, you are upset with the company and are trying to feel better by blaming the fact you didn't 100 times your money (yet) on the company. Geezeeeeee. >> 5) The fact that these loans total 80% of what IPM raised with their last PP doesn't matter because the price is so low that they didn't want to raise more (ignoring the fact that they were forced [why else raise it at this time?] to raise this working capital in the first place, proving the $1,000,000 is significant). << Up to this point, I though you were objective, fair, etc. Obviously, not so. I think you need to put your green eye shades back on, repeat the Microsoft oath to not misrepresent things at leat 10 times, turn off the Internet and go back to programming. Later Gerald (much).