SI
SI
discoversearch

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: mfgrep who wrote (14630)7/22/1998 7:17:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20681
 
Ledoux (in my opinion) would never risk their reputation on a company such as Naxos. I would choose to believe that the other assay labs such as Rocky Mountain or Arthur what's his name. These smaller less well known labs are more likely to fall for trickery or bribery (knowingly or unknowingly).

FWIW it is Ledoux who has risked their reputation in a very real sense. It is Rocky Mountain and Knight that have questioned the results and stuck by their guns.



To: mfgrep who wrote (14630)7/22/1998 9:11:00 PM
From: mark silvers  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20681
 
Jason
those "unknown" labs as you called them, that would be more susceptible to chicanery or bribery, are actually very well known labs, with reputations almost as large as Ledoux. I believe one of them is also a referee lab, but am not sure. None of those labs will knowingly engage in any activity to risk their reputation. It simply wouldn't be worth it to them from a risk/reward standpoint.

Mark


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News