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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dennis DeNoble who wrote (5237)	3/5/1998 9:04:00 PM
From: JACK R. SMITH JR.	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 14226

Dennis, My opinion is that perhaps not exactly now, but soon, we need to clear up former confusion. Perhaps Mr. Fishbaine has been confused by former statements by principals of the company, and perhaps he has not. What I do know is that rather fantastic statements have been made by those closely associated with the company for at least 15 years and none of those have come to fruition to date. What I think is that we need to build a new base of credibility based on FACT!! Here is a FACT that I would like to be reported. "Global Platinum and Gold has been paid "x" dollars for "x" dore which represents "x" days of production and forget future projections. I want to give you and the company a "heads up"! If, in the near future, meaningful stockholder information is not forthcoming, you and the principals in this company will be broke. Mark that down, and tell everyone that Jack Smith said it on March 5th, Year Of Our Lord, 1998! You, Sir, are the replacement of Ed Fishbaine, and I for one, expect your to fix the problem, and I will certainly give you time and space in which to do it! This certainly must be done. This is a 10 dollar stock which sells for less than $1.50 based on the incompetence of the management in terms of public relations. I know that this is harsh, and I really mean what I say. You have the ores and you have a workable and economic process, so why are we where we are? Mad as hell, Jack!!

To: Dennis DeNoble who wrote (5237)	3/5/1998 11:23:00 PM
From: francis terry	Respond to of 14226

Dennis: You said: >Taking this statement and your assumption that this translates to $1,200 per ton of head ore, that is still 4 ounces of gold equivalent per ton. > Are you saying that you would be unhappy if had 250,000 tons of only 3 gold equivalent ounces per ton sitting on the surface waiting to be refined? I don't really think so. ===================================================================== The following was abstracted from the official GPGI web-site: The following letter was received on 20 January 1998 from AuRIC Metallurgical Laboratories Dear Mr. Jensen, With this letter, AuRIC Metallurgical Laboratories, LLC, would like to confirm in writing, the points discussed in our meeting on January 15, 1998 and furthermore make the following proposals to your esteemed company: 1. Hassayampa Project . . . We have recently completed the processing and refining of a 9,813 gram batch of your "anode mud" product through our organic solvent extraction (SX) circuitry and started making payments on the recovered gold, platinum, palladium and rhodium metals. We would like to inform you that AuRIC is ready and willing to continue accepting this product for refining at any quantity you can supply. . . ==> As surprising as it seems to appear, we feel it is our duty to report to you that the recovery results from the first batch of your anode mud processing correlates back to your enhanced head ore, yielding a value between US$1,500 to US$2,000 per ton in gold, platinum, palladium and rhodium, (US$1,800 per ton in the batch we observed and refined).<=== Furthermore, please be informed that AuRIC is ready to start an assay program on your 500,000 ton ore stockpile, as well as the rest of the property in order to confirm and establish the extent of the above indicated values. We would, furthermore, like to perform full metallurgical balances on the Global process, with the help and participation of your technical department. . . Sincerely, Ahmet B. Altinay, General Manager. . ====================================================================== Are you now telling us now that Global's enhanced ore pile is only 250,000 tons and is really valued at less than $1,200/ ton??? It looks like Auric came up with at least the equivalent of 6 Ozs.($1,800) of Gold/ ton on their first try.!! It would really be nice to see some consistence from one announcement of Global's to the next!! I think a lot of the speculation and (possibly wild assumptions) could be eliminated if stockholder were given the true facts as to what is really going on at Global's mill! Ever hopeful, Francis Terry.

To: Dennis DeNoble who wrote (5237)	3/6/1998 11:46:00 AM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Hi Dennis, I hope you have been reading the thread this morning. There is a great amount of dissatisfaction on the part of many shareholders regarding communication from the company. I can appreciate your concern with not reporting inaccurate or incomplete or anticipatory statements about the company as has happened before you arrived. But understand that the shareholders who follow Global closely are alert people. They deserve clear statements of what is happening and even if these have to be couched in technical jargon they are capable of finding ways to get it translated. You don't have to offer guesstimates. But it would be reassuring to hear what the processes are and even what the road blocks might be. Believe me, if we knew the problems our anxiety would lessen because we would not be in the dark. Global has not been forthcoming in a straightforward manner. I hope you will correct this deficiency. Best of luck, Ed