SI
SI
discoversearch

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: mark silvers who wrote (12806)5/13/1998 12:17:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 20681
 
Mark,
just because some people have gotten angry about the valuation and reporting comments doesn't make them either invalid or inappropriate. FWIW I still stand by what I have said on both subjects.

This is really part of a longer term 'thread debate' that goes back to last year and the arguments that took place over the 'value' of rumours. I have a very strong view that a large segment of the shareholder base, including myself, bought into Naxos on the bullshit rumours being spread by certain individuals both inside and outside of the company. I won't name names because I am not sure that there were nefarious reasons for their rumours or mere incompetence. But a lot of well intentioned people, including everyone who posts to this thread and most if not all Naxos employees, bought into these rumours. The rumours of multiple ounce per ton yields fed people's fantasies of untold riches. I still recall the 'conservative' forecasts of multiple thousand dollar share prices.

The problem with these rumours is that it distracted everyone, including many well intentioned people inside of the company, from analyzing Franklin Lake using industry standard techniques. Mark you have asked about the Clyde Davis report. It is a very interesting report in that it shows that the property can be drilled and processed in such a way to respond to a standard fire assay. The problem with the process was that it was a complex process and deemed uneconomical. If at that point the company had anyone with professional mining experience I believe it highly likely that that person would have been able to discard the superfluous parts of the process and refine it to an economical process. The preliminary indications we have received recently have indicated that the company now has that expertise in house and have done exactly that.

This is not a current management versus old management issue. Current management was part of old management as well and bought into this just as we did. What is important is that people with real interest in creating a company that will be a viable producer that will create shareholder value are making decisions on the basis of building a business not gambling solely on a technological breakthrough. If this approach had been adopted at the time of the CLyde Davis report we would be years ahead of where we are now.

Is it possible this new approach will fail? Absolutely. But it is a sound and reasonable business approach that has a better chance for success, imho, than the old approach. This is still a risky equity. But it will take time for results to become apparent. We have to realize what is common business practice for information flow. Stuff takes time. One thing old management did was fend off criticism with statements that 'we'll be reporting drill results every two weeks'. They failed miserably in this regard and it is clear to me it is unreasonable and perhaps confusing to report such preliminary data so frequently. But it led to heightened expectations about what kind of information we would see. Some of us our acting likes rats on crack being denied a fix.

I feel it is very important to analyze our own expectations and reassess what Naxos is all about. Some people may find that the only reason they got involved in Naxos is because of the fantasy expectations. Imho they will be disappointed and should consider whether they over committed.

Henry