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: kenneth w. calligar who wrote (14702)	7/24/1998 2:46:00 PM
From: mfgrep	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Naxos is a dream client for a lawyer...win or lose. J

To: kenneth w. calligar who wrote (14702)	7/24/1998 4:07:00 PM
From: Tom Frederick	Respond to of 20681

Kenneth, my point on the "shares" issue was in the narrow category of which direction to take the company. It is a judgement decision which in either case is based on a genuine belief in the potential success of the path chosen. I don't think that anyone at the company has this grand scheme to destroy the stock price in order to reap rewards. The fact that it has happened is a little maddening, but it hardly seems a prudent business plan for success. As far as the different results from different labs, I don't know why we are all so surprised. I believe that had Naxos a better handle on information, we would have no release yet, with work being done to identify the descrepencies. Ledoux had the same trouble when they went through their first few rounds. I believe the check labs will get it figured out, but because of the need for a release, we are suffering through this with great agony instead of being in the dark as to the progress. The ASE issue is a genuine dilema. As I understand, the last hearings went in favor of Naxos with mountains of data supporting that Naxos has very real reasons to believe in the existance of PM's at Franklin Lake. The Alberta folks were apparently ill prepared and could not explain why they made virtually no effort to contact Naxos to clarify issues which they had problems with. The ASE is merely an attempt to hamper progress of the Naxos project. And to that end, they have been somewhat successful. It remains as a cloud over the whole project. As a general comment on who owns what shares, as even you have pointed out the benefits that some large shareholders have reaped with the last stock dip, it seems to me that this is a two edged sword for the court of public opinion. Build up the price and be praised for your support. The price drops and be bashed for benefiting through some very common moves to protect their financial butts. If someones livelyhood, (whether through financial investment, or by professional reputation) lies in the success of your company, you are motivated to put in the hours and the effort to do your very best to ensure success. If Fred has a couple million shares, but it represents only 1% of his net worth, who cares if Naxos fails. If Sid has staked his professional reputation on the success of Naxos, HE is the one at more risk wouldn't you say? Same goes for John and Jeremy, and even Russ. If Naxos fails they all have to go looking for work all over with the stamp of "that desert dirt project" all over them. Fred just goes back to the family business. I am simply pointing out that risk and committment are all relative and financial risk is EXTREMELY relative. Tom F.