To: E. Charters who wrote (11603 ) 7/30/1998 6:14:00 PM From: the Chief Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 34075
HI EC.I did not impugn anyone's right to speak on the KRY thread. Just advanced opinion and I was more than just active in the last few weeks. True, however, your arguments appeared more credible than the others. Not because you had more facts, but because Bears have a difficult time advancing their opinion without proof! Bulls have the advantage of taking the "company spoken word" and citing it as proof that all is OK! GE I listen to "proof" of this deposit with statements that 2 directors on GE board are from Barrick and Newmont. This only causes me flashbacks to P. Cavanaugh of Bre-X fame. He is/was one of the most respected ex-Barrrick employees in history. I listen to "proof" that Guido has identified these "micron sized flakes" that no-one else ever saw or thought of! I think of Felderhoff standing up and telling the media and geological society to "go back to school" because he chose to crush thewhole core rather than 1/2 because of a uniqueness in "his type of gold"!! I listen to proof that the deposit is there because the guy took a huge number of "grab" samples. Knowing the history of grab samples as I do.(at least my exposure to grab. over the last 15 years) I have learned one thing. No geologist worth his weight will ever grab "dirt"!! Therefore you get selective grab, therefore the results are tainted by that selective grab. I listen to proof that the deposit cannot be drilled because of the instability of the ground structure, yet the peasants are humping themselves up and down long tunnels (they call mine shafts) scraping out a living on 2g/t gold!! With all this evidence I still search for "proof", I have not invested in GE yet, I haven't completed all my DD. I would never say this is a SCAM, unless I had "proof" not innuendo, not rumour, not a gut feeling, but proof! the Chief