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: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (5663)	4/9/1998 5:46:00 PM
From: Bernard Elbaum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

The main problem with GPGI that I perceive is skepticism about the managerial and technical ability of Jensen and his team. Even if they have made progress, there is suspicion that the progress has been on a hit or miss basis, and that no fully scientific understanding of the refining operation has been achieved. Such suspicion leads to skepticism about success before the cash runs out, even though it also suggests that they might get lucky soon and would probably get there eventually given sufficient financial, managerial, and technical resources. Any comment?

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (5663)	4/9/1998 6:02:00 PM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Ed, <<operation would be miniscule compared to those costs.>> Then why isn't it done? <<enormous costs of bringing ore up from the depths of the earth?>> They can produce earnings with 0.02 OPT even with those expenses, so why isn't a slam dunk for GPGI? <<not because of anticipated huge costs of extraction>> I disagree, no dirt has yet proved economic extraction. However, the stock price is back where traders will be buying and prevent further price decline.

To: Ed Fishbaine who wrote (5663)	4/9/1998 8:50:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14226

Ed, the reason for worrying about costs is that in this case we still need to go through the electroplating process to extract the gold. Electroplating is much more expensive than the leaching process. In essence, if you need to use a ton of copper (and I am just using this number out of thin air) for each ton of ore, you now have to plate out a ton of copper before you concentrate the goodies in the sludge. I presume that the cost of plating copper is about $500 to $1000 ton (it is the major cost of copper, and copper is marginally profitable at $.7/lbs, thus taking $.25 to $.5 for electroplating is not exagerated, IMHO, but if anyone has better numbers, please mention these). Now, if a ton of ores has only $462 worth of goodies, getting the goodies in the sludge will cost more than the goodies (and the goodies in the sludge is not yet the purified goodies either). When we were working on the assumption of $2500 worth od goodies in the pile, $500 to $1000 cost of making the sludge still left a lot of profits on the table, but at $462, you might as well evaporate sea waters and extract the goodies from there. Having said that, unless the sample that I was given a year ago is not representative, I measured with X-ray fluorescence 110 PPM of AU in it and am still at a loss understanding the COC results. Zeev PS And do not look down on honey, this was one of my recommendations and it tripled deposition rates, of course, more consistent surface smoothing agents and dendrites growth inihibitors would be better, but this is another story.