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 : Medinah Mining Inc. (MDHM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Gold who wrote (5712)	8/24/1998 1:36:00 PM
From: DR. MEADE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25548

I think stock bottomed about 1/2 hour ago. I expect to see some heavy buying come in at these levels. Not a prediction, just my charting method.

To: Mike Gold who wrote (5712)	8/24/1998 1:51:00 PM
From: Ancil	Respond to of 25548

So many post have been made claiming that they have talked to the company and were told that this was going to happen and that was going to happen on a certain date and still has not happen. At this point in time and with the track record they have from the past I would not quote anything they told me without a disclaimer. Why don't you ask them to just jot it down on paper and fax it to you for your records. Lets see if they do. I am glad you have established such a good rapport with them. Good job. Thanks Ancil

To: Mike Gold who wrote (5712)	8/24/1998 2:10:00 PM
From: the Chief	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25548

Hi Mike."don't take offense, just being devil's advocate! 1) the company does not keep its shareholders informed of anything including natural progression or updates DISAGREE WITH THE WORD "ANYTHING"-HOWEVER, AGREE THAT THE COMPANY HAS NOT KEPT SHAREHOLDERS WELL INFORMED. Response: The company has produced selective information, that without proper background information, is illogical and in some cases downright confusing!! For instance wouldn't you like to know the thought process that led to the "Caton Tunnel"? Why was it most important? To say "WE" are doing it with little to No background is why I say "ANYTHING" in the above statement! 2) the company has not published "the deal" for the $34,000,000 procurement of the properties CORRECT-HAVE NOT SEEN THE DEAL ON PAPER ALTHOUGH I WAS TOLD THAT THE ANDICOLLO AND SANTIGAGO PROPERTIES WHERE PURCHASED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF 6 MILLION SHARES, A DOWNPAYMENT(150,000?) AND A PERCENTAGE OF FUTURE PRODUCTION REVENUES IF ANY-I'M HOPING FOR A MUCH CLEARER PICTURE OF THIS WHEN I GET COPY OF FINANICALS DOCUMENTS THIS WEEK. Response: "I was told" is an interpretation of a conversation between you and IR! This is third-party info, it even could be 100% misleading/incorrect because it is not "official company position" until an NR is released! What is the deal, the shareholders deserve and should demand official release, stating all of the commitments that the shareholders will have to bare to gain this property? 2a) the company has not explained fully, the rights to placer or hardrock on all its properties or the conditions attached thereto. COMPANY APPEARS TO A FULL RIGHTS TO THESE PROPERTIES-HAVE NOT SEE THIS IN ANY FORMAL DOCUMENT Response: "appears" that again is third party interpretation. It also appears they will gain perecentages based on expenditures and down the road commitments, all to the detriment of shareholder value! 2b) the company has not indicated what conditions must be fulfilled to attain 100% interest in the properties procured. COMPANY HAS FULL RIGHTS TO ANDICOLLO-HAS 80% RIGHTS TO SANTIAGO-HAVE NOT HEARD COMPANY EXPRESS AN INTEREST IN OBTAINING THE REMAINING 20% Response: this is a small portion of the concessions they have and does not represent the entire "deal", so also must be considered heresay, until the "deal" is found out! 2c) the company has not published how it intends on meeting the obligations attached to these properties and how it will effect shareholder value. CORRECT-AGAIN HOPE TO SEE THIS IN FINANCIALS 2d) the company has not published an independant assessment of the properties to show that they paid "fair market value", and were still protecting shareholder value. CORRECT-AGAIN HOPE TO THIS IN FINANCIALS 3) the company has dilluted shareholder value to raise money with vague stated purposes and no costings attached to show where money is going to be spent. CORRECT-SEE ABOVE 4) the company has no "five year, four year, three year, two year, one year plan" that shareholders can understand and monitor to determine that milestones are being met. CORRECT-HAVE SEEN NO PLAN 5) the company proceeded with "share solidification" between other companies with no stated purpose and no indication of why this was to the benefit of the existing shareholders. CORRECT-HOWEVER, IT SEEMS APPARANT THAT THEY DID THIS TO MAKE ANDICOLLO PROPERITIES TO BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO POTENTIAL BUYERS. Response:This also is an interpretation and conclusion that you have come to(I am not disagreeing with it) but, where's the company position. Why did they do it? Were they right ? 6) the company has not stated what the priority of properties are and what data that was processed by other companies is any good for future reference. THE COMPANY's CURRENT PRIORITIES ARE WHAT WAS STATED IN THE LAST PRESS RELEASE. Response: True, but what process did they use to elliminate the others? Was the geologist sent only to these properties? Did he go to all properties and elliminate those others and select this one? This kind of information makes a shareholder, heaven forbid, think that the company has a PLAN, and is not shooting from the hip!! Where did the 170,000,000 tonnes come from, is it from this concession within the property? How was that data accumulated? Was the data sampled in accordance with International Mining standards? Conclusion The thread has said! I've done my DD! ......have you...you be the judge. I believe noone can do proper DD on this company until this information is known, and I will be willing to debate anything somebody "really knows" for sure(as devil's advocate)! For those that think I am bashing!! I am not, I am looking for the same answers you are, that is all! MOO the Chief