SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tom Frederick who wrote (10788)3/22/1998 2:08:00 PM
From: Richard Mazzarella  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20681
 
Tom, <<The most recent testing from Ledoux and CMRI is believable.>> Sure it is, but that's what is causing some confusion. On the face of it, the standard fire head ore assay is excellent. Enough for me to speculate and buy a playa clay company. The thing that nags me is why couldn't that be done before. CHIP has never published an assay number while the whisper number there is 0.3 OPT. Naxos hasn't been able to do that before, always was some special preprocessing. I think it was Mark that speculated that it's the placer gold. If that's the case and other standard fire assays on head ore can't be done, one needs to be careful about claiming homogeneity for the playa. It may also suggest that JL or some other preprocessing may be required. Then we have even more questions on economics again. While the good evidence is coming in, there is still a long way to go before investors will rush in IMO. While some issues are answered it generates other questions.



To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10788)3/22/1998 3:35:00 PM
From: ShoppinTheNet  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20681
 
Tom, I do not know if I fit into your naysayer group or not. I an long Naxos and have been for some time. I also influence many others who hold positions in this stock. What I may suggest to you is the possibility of a third group of threaders, known as used to be
passive investors who now say time to put up the results and end the excuses. I am now in that group. I may be a group of one! Please excuse me if being a member of this group offends anyone.

With that said I would answer your questions as follows:

The most recent testing from Ledoux and CMRI is believable. T or F

I do not believe that Naxos has provided enough information in a clear concise manner to allow any objective person to categorically answer this question. If you are completely sold on this issue please detail how we can see such discrepancies in numbers. Clear up this issue for me and I will state true

Naxos is orchestrating the most complex gold scam in history T or F

False. But then any thing can happen.

The FL property, even if testing continues to show positive results, it just not to be
believed or invested in because ____________ ?

Many potential investors have to be saying stay away until current mgnt shows a clear plan to bring this project to a close within a reasonable time line. Many have called this stock an option. Anyone who has ever bought or sold an options contract knows that time is money.

Even with top names in mining on board, Naxos still is highly questionable because
________________.

No recovery process is proven to the investment public by Naxos at this time. Naxos mgnt has shown no desire to commit to any time line for any thing they do.

no matter what your issues have been with management, if the ore is there, someone will want it. In fact if that much ore is there, almost EVERYONE will want it.

This may be true. What you have to ask yourself is if it is true how will they get it? They can buy into Naxos now, or wait till Naxos fails and get it for a song.

I believe strongly that Naxos is at a point were any shareholder who believes with 100% blind faith that given enough time and money Naxos will survive, is using rose colored glasses and they should take them off and press hard to your mgnt team. Make them perform. Do not sit back and say status qou is OK. Ask hard questions and expect true honest answers.

I hope that I have done well in the elucidation of my position!



To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10788)3/22/1998 3:48:00 PM
From: Dick Hoaxland  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 20681
 
Why after more than a decade of development is no one interested in
Franklin Lakes if it indeed has potential?