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 : Golden Eagle Int. (MYNG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rjbac who wrote (10100)	7/16/1998 1:25:00 AM
From: toma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

rjbac - you stated: "The May 22 press release has absolutely no basis in fact since the report used to back up that release has and will not be released due to questionable findings and mistakes, within the report, that people at GE/MINE made and told the SEC." I believe the May 22 press release, in and of itself, was based on Mr Paravicin's report. The SEC is questioning this report, which, you and I both believe (and agree), should be questioned and confirmed, to the benefit if the company and the shareholders. Where you and I disagree, and where I think your argument is flawed, is the you imply that poeple assume the press release, report, etc are fraudulent simply because the SEC is questioning it's validity. The report does not get simply thrown out because of the SEC...in fact it get puts under the white hot spot light. It has become the central issue. As some of the other responders point out...most people considering buying a penny stock are going to be skeptical...so, what's your point. I would love to review the entire report. The proof is in the pudding...only the pudding is not in someone else's refridgerator! time will tell. a 3rd part will be contracted, most likely behre dolbear. if it is DB, or a similar reputable firm, we will be certain that their assessment hold water. toma

To: rjbac who wrote (10100)	7/16/1998 1:53:00 AM
From: Jim Bishop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

<Please show me GUIDO's report and GET BACK TO ME AS SOON AS YOU CAN....> Talk to the SEC, they are the only ones keeping you from reading the report, or at least a summary of it. Go yell at them, we've got enough screamers on this thread as it is. Have you even spoken with the SEC, have you told them you want to see the report to make your own jugdement on it? SEC, in acting as censors, keeping us pink (assuming they are the one's keeping us there) have done much more to hype this stock than GE has ever done. Oh they got the word of caution out all right, but not in nearly as effective a way as Terry Turner has from day one. Read all TT's warnings and disclaimers in anything he has written, or had written about him, including all news releases, the web site, the 8K, etc., etc.. All they have accomplished so far is to add to the confusion, add to the hype, get the press interested, keep the report under wraps, and cause a lot of people to get hosed by the MM's while buying and selling, or trying to buy/sell a pink sheet stock. Some protection job!

To: rjbac who wrote (10100)	7/16/1998 9:19:00 AM
From: john	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

< states additional FRAUD charges may be> "May" is the key word. The May 22 release must be read and digested, some things to note in it. The warning from the company concerning the fact that it is not verifed, that is some kinda HYPE, or did you miss that???? The other part was the fact that he took the lowest ASSAY results not the average. And I do agree with you we NEED to see the report and I believe in due course we will. I do not think it will be made public until the third party is done. Naturally all potential investors should way these facts before buying into this company. Investors new to this forum should they decide to invest should NOT put in an order at MARKET, put a limit on it. Remember, new POTENTIAL investors "the gold is there to economically MINE or it is not" DO YOUR OWN DD, please do not take my word for it and for sure question rjbac because he is one sided totally. I am prepared to discuss both sides and I agree to some degree with rjbac it is risky. regards john