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 (12524)	5/1/1998 3:36:00 PM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Mr. 2, Based on some very sound advice I am committing myself to not make a mountain out of a Hill. If he answers, fine. But if he does I will predict right now that it will be with empty presumptions and very little hard fact. On your other point, continued results on COC ore with SFA testing will shed the past quite well. That is really all the mining people care about. As long as there is a rich ore body, most if not all other problems can be addressed and likely overcome. I don't think Mr. Smith going to Washington, I'm sorry New York would have been arranged or planned if he were NOT able to at least speak to someone there. (I'm pretty sure he has already seen the twin towers and statue of liberty) Who he went to see and why we don't know, but IF he was given the opportunity to keep the Naxos story in front of the right people, then he would have only been given this opportunity if the Naxos dark cloud was for all intents and purposes a non-issue. Otherwise, why spend the time with him? Of course on this specific issue I speculate. If anyone wants to call him direct to get the straight answer, that is the best way to keep yourselves informed. That is why they give out his phone number. Let's hope we see the rest of the BD holes soon. That will keep filling in the picture for us. Tom F.

To: ShoppinTheNet who wrote (12524)	5/1/1998 4:22:00 PM
From: Tim Hall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

<<If the recovery process is standard, and simple, then we should be seeing proof of this process very soon. Lets say two months tops. Please, any mining professionals correct this guess, I pulled it out of my hat for sake of discussion. >> Since I have a document from the State of New Mexico that states I am a Professional Mining Engineer, I will take a crack at this. The recovery process will depend on the mineralization. Is the gold free gold, bound in pyrite, bound in hemitite or magnetite, petzite, bound in quartz, contained in some other compound or a combination of the above? I have not heard of any attempt by the company to understand the mineralization, except for the Johnson work. Any of the above will respond to a standard fire assay. Each of the above generally requires a differnt recovery process. Not all of these processes are cheap or simple. Some are and some aren't. Until the company can determine the mineralization involved, they won't be able to project recovery costs. IMHO Tim Hall