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: ShoppinTheNet who wrote (12398)	4/28/1998 9:24:00 PM
From: sh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

SK, Very well said. I really get annoyed when people who used to tell us (or at the very least, strongly suggest) that the stock is way undervalued, are now telling us it is properly valued (if not undervalued) at these lower levels. The least I would expect is some explanation of the change of opinion here. Although I've seen some attempted explanations, such as the lower assay results (btw, have the prior exceptional results been completely disregarded? unless Johnson was a fraud and Ledoux was involved in his fraud, I don't see how anyone could disregard them) and low volume of results, that does not sufficiently explain the price. I seem to recall that we had at least a hundred non-COC assay results in the .1+ range for some time now. Why are those results now being discounted (if not outright disregarded)? Yes, I believe like most, I'm frustrated with the snails pace of results and what I perceive as the undervalued price of the stock given the consistency between what the company is coming up with now as compared to what it came up with in the past without COC (and the potential for major enhancement of recovery with the Johnson process). sh

To: ShoppinTheNet who wrote (12398)	4/29/1998 9:58:00 AM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

All right Sk, Here we go-- <<t should be noted that I do not follow the popular notion that Naxos got ahead of itself in terms of price. I feel that stocks often do get somewhat over priced or ahead of themselves. They do not however, get ahead of themselves to the tune of 3 times its price.>> Actually they can and do. There are a lot of internet stocks that would currently fall into that category. <<Generally when solid stocks do get ahead of themselves they tend to move sideways for a long enough period of time, allowing for the price to get in sink with they true value.>> Naxos is not a solid stock in the sense that they have a solid history or solid financial track record. It is all a bet on the come. That is not a solid stock, it is a very high risk speculative play. Time is not enough to allow the stock to achieve fair value by trading sideways. Rapid movements up and down are normal for these stocks. << I myself believe that the stock commanded a price of $10 for a time due to the information on hand at the time. That information was a process (J&L) that was said to be economical and was showing assay levels of just over one once per ton. This information made the risk of holding or paying $10 for the stock reasonable for all who did indeed buy at that price. The stock now trades at a level (as Tom says) based on the worth of 1 1/2 holes>> $10 for a stock with NO holes(at that time) and an unproven black box process is over valued. Granted, it is easier to see that in hindsight than it was at the time, but it IS overvalued none the less. Some one posted last night(I cant remember who) that they are tired of hearing from people that thought the stock was undervalued, that it is now overvalued or at fair value. If you are speaking about Henry and I, I think that you have to differentiate between potential value and current fair value. They can be mutually exclusive targets. SK, no one is saying that you shouldnt express your concerns. Express them all you want. The problem, IMO, is that you and a few others think that the company is obligated to give you more information than they are required to. No Professional comapny gives minute by minute, blow by blow details of the everyday workings of the company. they shold give us clear and concise updates on a regular basis. For many companies, that means quarterly. Also, you told us what you agree with as far as other peoples posts, and how you plan to monitor your investment. You didnt say anything about the plans of the company and what you like or would do differently. that is what I was looking for. Mark

To: ShoppinTheNet who wrote (12398)	4/29/1998 2:38:00 PM
From: RRG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Excellent post Chewy! Re the AGM, there is power in numbers; and I would suggest considering gathering, in discussion, those who have similar views to see if we can encourage expressing these views and/or our concerns at the AGM. It's obvious, in looking back, that Naxos has gone down many costly blind alleys. The perception in the market place that has been very critical of management (focusing on JJ) certainly must be factored into the stock price equation. Is Naxos now getting its act together? Possibly---but I think the market is still suspicious---and in effect is saying "Show Me". BobG