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 : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron Struthers who wrote (31462)	4/6/1998 4:56:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 35569

<<Lee Furlong mentioned numerous times and to many people that he felt the 0.25 opt was a hot spot (or a high grade area on the property). This info was in my newsletter as well.>> Ron: Who did he mention this to? There was certainly no mention of .25opt being a "hot spot" in any of IPM's PR's, President's messages, or any other official communication from the company. If true, I find it to be quite irresponsible, downright misleading, and outright scandalous of IPM to issue PR after PR hyping .25 opt if they believed it was a "hot spot." Mentioning .25 opt is a hot spot in private while publically hyping .25 opt sounds like a violation of securities laws to me. Seems to me like some are trying to rewrite the IPM history book. When was this information in your newsletter? Prior to November 14, 1997? It certainly wasn't mentioned in any of your posts on this thread, or any of your newsletters you made available on the web for nonsubscribers.