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: Kim W. Brasington who wrote (8395)	1/22/1998 9:01:00 AM
From: Max Haber	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Kim, Time for you to write the press releases. And a qustion. The last press release that showed the fantastic chain of custody results was great news delivered in a very confusing manner. If those results were from a sand and gravel sample that was dug by B/D and tested by Ledoux and showed more than 1 ounce/ton by a conventional process is a huge bonus. Most investors understand the economics of a conventional ore much more than the clay ore and the J/L process. It's the yield per ton, costs per ton, not the method that is important. If Naxos can show those type of COC numbers by a conventional process ONLY 160 feet below the surface it could be huge. Combining that with the J/L method ----even better. In South Africa they burrow through rock 1-3 miles below the surface to mine gold at a fraction of these reported yields. Question for you Kim, 1.) On this hole that was tested and reported by Ledoux, who picked the drilling site Naxos or B/D? 2.) What is the approx. spacing between the holes drilled by B/D? 3.) In conventional ore bodies it is MY understanding that gold and platinum do not mix as they can in the clay part of the F.L. property. Would that help explain why platinum in the last report was"not detected" or did they not do the platinum tests? Thanks Max Haber

To: Kim W. Brasington who wrote (8395)	1/22/1998 12:00:00 PM
From: Jerry in Omaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Mr. Brasington; I know you have had a lot of questions fired at you lately but I'm afraid I have to add a few more to the interrogatory volley. What options does the company have with respect to all the data collected prior to the Behre Dolbear supervised sample collection and establishment of COC? At best all that information now resides in a kind of credibility limbo with respect to the public. What level of internal credibiliy and utility does the company assign to all our previously collected information? What future uses could exist for the data and would it need to be re- habilitated in some way? Are there plans to use the prior information in the future to assist in the determination of of total estimated reserves? There are a couple of ancillary questions as well if you can get the authority to address them. Do we have an inventory of previously drilled and collected samples which could be re-assayed with the johnson assay and results compared to previous assays? What is the company sentiment toward abandoning all previous data in favor of a total program of COC sample collection and assay? If anyone else would care to address these issues please feel free. Jerard P P.S. Welcome Mr. mfgrep. I'm sure all appreciate hearing nice things you said about our thread and its contributors.