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 : International Precious Metals (IPMCF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: go4it who wrote (33551)	8/3/1998 12:47:00 AM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

Chuck: For your Bateman theory to make sense, wouldn't Behre Dolbear have to have been an accomplice to whatever it is that Bateman did to screw IPM? After all, BD was there for much longer than Bateman. For that matter, wouldn't Lyposuction or whatever their name was have to be involved as well? Seems a little far-fetched to suggest that all these firms colluded to screw IPM.

To: go4it who wrote (33551)	8/3/1998 5:54:00 PM
From: Bob Jagow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35569

. what does non-commercial mean? [At first before I ever put any serious thought into it I assumed that it meant that a continues flow operation could not be achieved.] You must remember comments from several sources that the process had to be strongly tailored to the sample! The then newly-discovered large variability of the ore samples was the stumbling block AFAIK. Till then, it was one big homogeneous basin with a correspondingly huge imputed valuation.