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: Henry Volquardsen who wrote (14107)	7/9/1998 7:53:00 AM
From: Lionel Hungar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

It is very sad to see the promoters on this message board putting their own welfare ahead of the honest shareholders of Naxos Resources. These human leeches do not care about increasing shareholder value because these do-nothings get paid regardless. We all know who they are as they desperately try to convince you that change is not needed and Carl Campbell is wrong. The current management even went as far as to bring back Jay Taylor who has no credibility or loyalty for that matter. We need people who are dedicated to enhancing shareholder value and get rid of the deadbeats who contiously post warm and fuzzy messages about how well Naxos is progressing while filling their own pockets at shareholder expense. Carl Campbell is fed up with it. Look at the share price. Lets not tolerate management incompetence any longer. Lionel Hungar

To: Henry Volquardsen who wrote (14107)	7/9/1998 7:59:00 AM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 20681

TO EVERYONE!!!!! I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A LOT LAST NIGHT. PLEASE READ THIS PARAGRAPH. <<The object here is to make money, and the politics--and poltical actors--have to be TOTALLY swept out.>> AL C <<I totally agree with this. We need to get rid of all the self serving actors. Although I have expressed concerns about J/L those concerns are more about the businessmen there. Dr Johnson is a credible individual and I do hope he has success with his process as an enhancement technique. I still feel strongly that we need to go with the conventional technique as the front line and Dr Johnson as part of the recovery analysis. My major question about J/L revolves around his association with Austin Lett and Matt Walters. I have serious questions about the ethics of what they did and will always make me suspicious in any dealings with them. >> Henry That paragraph shows one very important point. WE ALL WANT THE SAME THING, WITH THE SAME BASIC RESULT, BUT ARE TOO CAUGHT UP IN TRYING TO PROVE EACH OTHER WRONG, AND FEEDING INTO OUR MISTRUST OF EACH OTHER.THE RESULT IS IT IS KILLIING OUR COMPANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, EVERYONE WANTS J/L TO PLAY A ROLE IN NAXOS. HELL, I WANT J/L TO PLAY A ROLE IN NAXOS. I WANT J/L TO SUCCEED. WE ALL WANT THE SAME THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AS SHAREHOLDERS WE SHOULD, DEMAND THAT ANYONE IN MGMT, AND ANYONE WHO WANTS TO BE IN MGMT MAKE SURE WE ALL GET WHAT WE WANT WITHOUT DESTROYING NAXOS IN THE PROCESS. MAKING NAXOS A SUCCESS SHOULD OUTWEIGH OUR INDIVIDUAL EGOS AND GREED. HOW DO WE GET THIS DONE? LETS STOP THE BULLSHIT AND THE ACRIMONY RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW!!!!! LETS ALL WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS GO SMOOTHLY AND DONT GET PULLED APART. DONT LET ANYONE OR ANYTHING DESTORY THAT. IF WE HAVE DISAGREEMENTS, LETS TALK THEM OUT RATIONALLY. DEMAND NOTHING LESS. PLEASE, ANYONE, POST SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS. LETS DEMAND THAT ALL SIDES TALK RATIONALLY WIOTH NOTHING BUT OUR BEST INTERESTS IN MIND. DEMAND THIS FROM ALL SIDES!!!!!!!!!! WHAT MATTERS MOST IS THAT WE REACH OUR GOALS. I WILL START BY PERSONALLY APOLOGIZING TO ANYONE THAT I MIGHT HAVE OFFENDED IN MY EXUBERANCE. THAT INCLUDES(BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO) CHEWY, MATT, AUSTIN, AL C, KURT OR ANYONE ELSE. I WANT THIS TO SUCCEED, AND I THINK J/L SHOULD BE A PART OF IT. DOES IT MATTER IF IT IS IN THE FOREFRONT OR BACKGROUND? I THINK SO, BUT LETS DISCUSS IT. LETS PROVE IT, AND MOVE FORWARD. LETS DO THE CONVENTIONAL, BOTH CAN BE DONE SIMULTANEOUSLY. COMMENTS? MARK

To: Henry Volquardsen who wrote (14107)	7/9/1998 3:48:00 PM
From: Al C	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

TO HENRY VOLQUARDSEN, "If assays are higher than 0.06-0.08, then they are economical." Here are the assays, Henry: 6/11/98 98-1 .093 98-2 .075 RC-2 .037 RC-3 .038 5/15/98 RC-1 .057 4/24/98 RC-4 .033 Average above .055 3/18&4/8 RC-5 .223* Average all .079 *These results used both Johnson equipment and proprietary assay ideas, both subsequently discontinued as Johnson withdrew his assistance. The lower subsequent results clearly reflect this break off of relations. The Press Release of 3/18 said these results "do not use Johnson-Lett process," but did not disclose the results DID use his equipment and assay ideas. Release of 4/8 said results used "standard fire assay with ICP finish;" but again did not disclose that the results DID use Johnson's equipment and proprietary assay ideas. With or without these last assay results, the assays are NOT above the 0.06-0.08 range estimated to be breakeven. The misdescription of the last assay results is part of the BIGGER problem at hand (management). Al C