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: Tom Frederick who wrote (10989)	3/25/1998 6:15:00 PM
From: Tommy G.	Respond to of 20681

Mar 25, 1998 5:42:01 PM ET (delayed) Last Change % Change Volume 41/4 3/8 9.68 18,500 Low High 35/8 41/4

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10989)	3/25/1998 7:14:00 PM
From: ShoppinTheNet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

The Dickster is a trickster but he is not Matt. I would like to thank Dick for coming to the Naxos thread , if he was not here today there would have been 75% less posts to read. What would have been left would be how much and what type of coffee we all had today. I myself had 12 oz. of pure black Java. Seems I forgot the name but you know what Allshimers does for you. I think Dick that you do pose a interesting question! Just why would you Join SI after reading it for some time, and then only ask one work related question on another thread and come to Naxos and blast it?. I do not think you are Matt. I think you have two SI call names myself. Could it be possible that you are Henrys alter ego? LOL Another good question is why would one pick a name like Dick Hoaxland ? I understand the Hoaxland part but Dick? You must love a good fight.Did you hang out in any NY Irish bars and pick fights? Anyway looking at your name, Dick could be used as in: This is dicked up! Meaning this is screwed up. Hoax means of course scam. Land is of course just that. SO put them all together and we have: Naxos is a Screwed up hoax. I therfore sumise that you are truly saying Naxos is not a scam! WOW that is so cool, and you even trick us all by putting out negative posts. How long have you owned Naxos? You computor geeks are to much for me. I am going to stick to picking on Henerey he is more fun!

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (10989)	3/26/1998 1:54:00 AM
From: Lawrence Brierley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

Tom F., Let me just preface this by saying that I very much appreciate your posts. In fact, one comment which I had tried to post on the "night of the long knives" two weeks ago (subsequently wiped out with the post I was responding to) was was a comment on how different it was to suffer through another stock value collapse for our desert obsession, NXR, with SI for company. For all of my preceding heart-stopper tumbles with this stock I only had myself and my company info to sift through to reassure myself that my course was in fact a rational, if rather adventuresome one. It struck me that night that a careful parsing of your posts was an excellent way to reinforce the conviction which originally brought me to this stock. It might take months but it would do the trick! :-) Anyway, this is a convoluted way of letting you know that there are some out here who are appreciating your relentless and persistent recourse to the facts about this company. "Mr. Hoax, over the time period you mention, Naxos has tried over 50 methods of assay. The reason it has taken so long is that Naxos spent much too much time trying to get repeatable numbers in the range of some very high results they could get...sometimes. This was a waste of time in retrospect." My feeling is that it is still too early to know whether this was a waste of time. I like Mark's observation that the higher COC numbers obtained in the past are an indication that at least these concentrations are present, even if not always recoverable. It may be that there will always be significant variability of recovery using the J/L or other techniques. We may find that inconsistency will plague the pilot plant results and perhaps one day even the definitive recovery facility. I know that to attract large investment concerns consistent results are very valuable, but it is possible that the nature of this clay and the processes required to liberate PMs are incompatible with consistency. It is important to realize that over the past year all of the results range from good to astonishing. There have been no bad results be COC! No on will care if one day successive batches of dirt processed in a recovery facility yield wildly variable but still rich concentrations. Perhaps our fixation with consistency in assay and recovery results is only delaying us in reaching our ultimate goal of extracting and selling the goods. Just a thought. The best, Lawrence