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: jlallen who wrote (15294)	8/6/1998 4:03:00 PM
From: Tim Hall	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

jla, It would also appear that this standard fire assay might not be such a standard after all. Any of these labs should be able to due a SFA with their eyes closed. (Even with minor modifications for FL.) Tim Hall

To: jlallen who wrote (15294)	8/6/1998 4:16:00 PM
From: Neal davidson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

John: Your post was neither negative nor redundant (I will, from here on, be the self anointed judge of negativity and redundancy <VBG>). I agree with your post. My concern was based on the fact that the focus seems to be on Ledoux's results, as if reasonable science dictates that those results should be questioned. I am uncomfortable with that approach. I want the lower numbers to be challenged as erroneous. But, I suppose you are correct that Ledoux must stand behind its numbers, as that would shift the focus to why the other labs cannot verify Ledoux's results.