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 : A New Age In Gold Refining -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Irv A. Weinberger who wrote (586)	2/7/1998 12:42:00 PM
From: SnakeInATuxedo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 672

Mr Weinberger, I'll leave to Mr. Wendell the discourse on the technical feasibility, but I think the "... standardisation of DD production" is going to hinge on being able to reduce the various types of microcluster ores to a "common denominator" form - be it d'ore, sludge, leachate concentrate, whatever - that any traditional refiner can deal with on a consistent basis. When that "common denominator" can be agreed upon - assuming it exists and can be arrived at by most DD's - then... look out!

To: Irv A. Weinberger who wrote (586)	2/7/1998 9:17:00 PM
From: Michael J. Wendell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 672

Hi Irv, It is good to learn a little about a person's background. It excites me to learn that O&G was where you came from. Some of the best people in mining came from the O & G industry. There they learn how to assess risk; not from one exposure but from hundreds or thousands of resources plays. I also came from an O & G background, but was always in mining. I learned that if you want to try something and your cash burn is $100,000 per month, the cost to try is $200,000, then you have the first fundamentals for making a decision. If there is a reasonable chance that success will later increase your cash flow by $300,000 per month, don't study it to death and maybe spend $500,000 on the study and lost time when the risk is probably not improved. Go for it. If the hole is dry, don't cry, you have had numerous successes before, there will be more. Call the parties involved, call a dry hole a dry hole and move on. One of my first rules (I have many first rules)is don't take big chances unless the reward is huge. Make sure the risk will make your new company a legitimate corporate entity if the project is a success. That is a measured by a consistent and important net cash flow. After getting successful and becoming a big company, change your ways, fire the risk takers and work more closely to the vest. Hire the engineers and CPAs. You now have something to lose. The DD companies have no control on cash burn. If they take a chance and fail the whole company fails. If they use last months promoted money to finance promoting next months money, everyone keeps their jobs. At least until the investors tire of the never ending support and loose favor with the speculation. I think that the way to finance these projects is with project financing. The company has the prospect or prospects, investors earn an equity interest in the project as well as the company. It is not the promoter with a "claim or two" planted in the desert that makes the mine. It is the investors. Management should darn well know it is the investors that make it happen. These companies have to develop technology. They have no choice if they are to succeed. A person investing in technology development should benefit in a special part of the profits as the reward for making an almost stupid choice. It only works if the project succeeds. The financing for the process development risk should be promoted on the basis of what it is, who will lead the effort, their background in these types of projects and how well they have analyzed the goal so as to make better decisions along the way. When this is done, the financial backers will be able to assess when to support or when to call the deal a dry hole. That way a company can support its stock without dilution, benefit from all of the opportunities developed by a successful research effort and try to buy back all of its partners when success is found. The investors can then determine the value of their reward based on good sound economic projections. Or is all that too simple. mike