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: Scott Wheeler who wrote (6554)	7/10/1998 11:32:00 AM
From: Mike McKay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14226

To All: I am sorry that I haven't replied to any of you to thank you for your kind words, I have been away at the beach for a few days with friends. Zeev: I don't have the tech specs. For every dollars worth of resin they should be able to load 40-50 dollars worth of PGM. Therefore, the cost of the resin is not a significant factor if it is used only once. I was hoping that GPGI would establish a long-term supply agreement with Sabin and concentrate their efforts on gearing up production. If they start eluting then I will take some time to look into this further. Again, sorry for taking so long and not answering your questions directly. Scott: In my current job I normally experience very little free time. Unfortunately, I have been working on a couple of major projects which just compounds my time availability problem. You asked why I would post at this time, to be fair I'm not sure. I almost posted in March but never got around to finalizing what I wanted to say. I am probably posting now because of IPM's chapter 11 and probably because this most recent commitment to GPGI will result in positive cash flow. With respect to your question on how much we paid for our shares, I think it is inappropriate to reply directly as I am also disclosing information on other shareholders. I can tell you that the current funding commitment was made well before the most current dip in price. Our approach to funding is to provide financial flexibility to management such that they can focus on the task at hand, which is ramping up production. We wanted to provide management with the necessary financial assistance so they could plan in confidence. As long-term investors, getting shares at the cheapest price is far outweighed by having management bring GPGI to profitability. I realize that our approach is not consistent with shareholders who are active traders. I don't have the time luxury to do that, basically I buy and hold. Scott, on your other points: My guess is that GPGI will not undergo any further dilution unless management were to change their plan of action. I understand this to be to get into continuous production and then ramp up production and then...only Dick Jensen can tell you for sure. 100 tons of enhanced ore would generate about 10 tons of precipitate. The precipitate after it comes through the filter press reminds me of damp sand like that you find under the dry sand at a beach. The precipitate can be dried by simply laying it out on concrete slabs and letting the Arizona heat and lack of humidity do its job. My personal preference would be that GPGI install pre-heaters so that the precipitate is hot when it is charged into the furnace. This will have two effects: (1) ensure dryness and (2) reduce tap-to-tap time on the furnace. The other question was what did I mean by "an order of magnitude less" - simply put, GPGI capital costs would be 1/10 the cost of Stillwaters. All of the above is my personal opinion. To those of you who e-mailed me: My sincere apologies for not replying to any of you as of yet. These entries on Silicon Investor are in actual fact typed by the staff as I am at best a two-finger typist. Add to this my lack of time and you get someone who doesn't use e-mail, I still use the telephone. I will be away off and on over the next three weeks so I may not be able to correspond again for awhile.