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: Jerry in Omaha who wrote (12836)	5/14/1998 11:32:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

Jerard, If a bridge gets you to the other side what do you care that it collapses the instant you walk off of it. If your goal is to only cross one bridge then you care not if the bridge collapses after you cross. But life is a process of learning from experience. I want to learn from life so I can better analyze future bridges. We may not be as lucky next time. Does this mean that the decision to cross the bridge in the first place was wrong? Obviously not. Au contraire. The original decision was wrong. As I stated, I believe if the company continued to operate in the manner it did in prior years it would fail. And we were nuts to get involved. The subsequent recognition of what needs to be done my company management holds the prospect for bailing us out. But it would be wrong to think our original decision was correct. We need to recognize that so we can learn from the past and be more diligent in our analysis in the future. Multiple ounce quantities of precious metals exist at Franklin Lake. We have certified numbers to prove that. We have test results that show that but we also have anecdotal reports that there was trouble generating consistent values. In the reports we have seen we have seen mention of both the possibility of free gold and comments that the sampling size used with the J/L process was small. This opens the possibility in my mind that when free gold was present in a small sample it would spike the results and imply multiple ounces. If there was no free gold in a particular sample the number would come up blank. We would then hear comments about consistency because some times they would get very high numbers and sometimes not. With larger sampling size you get a better indication of true grade which is how the current assays are being done. I have not confirmed this with any one at the company and this is my speculation only but I suspect the multiple ounces were a result of small sampling size and have not held up under larger sampling. I am not holding my breath for two or three ounces of gold per ton and looking for other metals. I suspect this is a fantasy and am only interested in seeing SFA results on a 'conventional' processing and will leave the research to the mine feasibility studies. Precious metals do not spontaneously generate during an assay procedure although they often can disappear leading to so called inconsistent results. True. But finding free gold particles in a 20 ounce sample that was selected at random and extrapolating it over a ton may skew results. Taking all the material from a 10 foot interval, processing it and mixing it and then select your sample will give you a truer picture of average grade. Mr. Volquardsen, if you applied the same standards of veracity and proof to many of the technical analysis systems available to chart stocks or predict economic growth how many would pass your dubious muster? None. I believe technical analysis is voodoo and Econometrics is horse shit. What makes you believe I support either? Also what does either have to do with the price of Naxos as I have never referenced either. And specifically what is dubious anout my muster? As a member of a professional collective it seems you are feeling a conflict with regard to your position on the rumor tightrope between Dr. Groves on one side and COC from a new drill program on another. The individual wants to bet on Dr. Groves and the professional damn well knows he should wait for the COC. I am feeling no conflict. I am at peace with my decisions and my current investment. But I am also interested in learning from the past. But Naxos is no about a new technology. I don't believe there is a new technology that will generate multiple ounces per ton. If that was all there was to the Naxos story I would sell and move on. No conflict. I remain very interested in Naxos because of my belief they will be able to prove out a large and valuable conventional deposit of multiple metals. The emotional individual (inner child) who first bought the stock has had his hand slapped and sent to bed without dinner. The professional is continuing to do his research and monitor his investments and is back in control of the portfolio. Henry

To: Jerry in Omaha who wrote (12836)	5/14/1998 6:44:00 PM
From: ShoppinTheNet	Respond to of 20681

Henry made me do this!! PJ if we had crossed that bridge on top of an elephant, would we have seen the faulty bridge, or would we have tried to cross and thus make the bridge collapse in the middle? Also if Henry was to ride on top an elephant, would he see the superior force in the Red Sox compared to the Yankees? Would he also see that New Hampshire is the best place for him to "live free or die"? Or would living in New Hampshire cause him to eat goat cheese to often?