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: Randall E. Brubaker who wrote (6623)	7/12/1998 4:27:00 PM
From: Jeff Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Randall: I don't think anyone knows how many total reserves are owned by GPGI, but between the Hassayampa and the Weaver Creek, they'll still be in ore when you and I are long gone (at least me). If you add in the Oro Grande, you're talking 1100 acres down to 700 feet which is still in ore to depth and on strike. Inco's geologist (Peter someone, I forget his last name at the moment) thought they'd probably be in ore to at least 1000-1500 feet in depth as I recall. And they only drilled 1/10 of the total property. I think it was Mike Thomas that calculated over a trillion tons (proven and probable) between the OG and WC. As to what sort of a "trading range that might translate into," you might recall Barry Downs discounted the reserves to a 1/3 level and came up with $100. Let's be conservative and say a range between $40-50 once they get the Oro Grande and WC in production along with the Hassayampa. Of course, this won't happen next week, but it is certainly possible in 2-3 years IMO. As to a short term trading range, I think that's difficult to project, but $4-5 doesn't seem out of the question in the next 30-60 days IMO. After all, look what they've done with virtually no money. Imagine what more could happen with cash flow and/or a JV partner, or both. It kind of boggles the mind, doesn't it??? Regards, Jeff

To: Randall E. Brubaker who wrote (6623)	7/12/1998 9:54:00 PM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Randall, You are correct. There are always going to be naysayers and doubters no matter how high the price of the shares go. There certainly will be those who complain that the reserves are not proven and that there has been no Chain of Custody accomplished. Even if Global is paid $500,000 per week for the metal it produces there will be those who say there has been no COC. That trenchs down to 30 feet all over the Weaver Creek tested the ore and found pgm values means nothing. That the Hasssayampa ore pile was similarly tested means nothing. That McFarland and Hullinger produced gold from the Weaver Creek and sold it to Johnson Mathey means nothing (their method was uneconomical so they quit). Jensen early on elected to go for production not for formal reserve studies once he was convinced of the presence of pgms on his properties. Comparing his results with those of the other desert dirts which have sought formal reserve studies and COCs is interesting. Regards, Ed P.S. I used $500,000 as an example. I have no idea of what the future production of Global will be. But it will, IMO, be shocking to you and me and to the precious metals industry. And by the way, I plead guilty to Zeev's accusation that I have fallen in love with this stock.