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: d:oug who wrote (34027)	9/7/1998 5:00:00 AM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 35569

Look Doug, I feel sorry for you if you have lost money on this stock. like many golds it has brought a lot of people down. It was a hype of new technology and unheretofore discovered gold. I did not believe it. Neither did a lot of others. The one thing we have in common is we have worked in the field as miners and professionals. Bill is the director of a CDN gold company and a chemical engineer, Thall is a mine manager in the States and I am an assayer with 20 years experience in mining exploration and milling. There is no agenda. There is no desire to see people lose money. There is no secret posting behind peoples backs. There is no orchestrated campaign. I receive the odd mail from Bill and none at all from thall or very few in my recall. We rarely if ever talk about the personalities here on the thread. It is just an interesting place to post and a focus of attention. And it might just be another New Cinch like scam. I challenge you to prove otherwise. What happens is some people make a statement or opinion to the negative based upon their professional experience or judgement. A few stock holders see red and start slinging mud about their baby. And off it goes. But in all my years posting on SI I have yet to have a pure academic or scientific argument on a peer to peer basis. It always the "you have an agenda" and "we know all about you" and other name calling. I would dearly like to have an intelligent debate about the topics presented on SI about any mining assay method or milling process but so far I have yet to meet anyone who has the faintest idea which end is up in an open pit. One guy got on my case when I bashed Northrich Pacific who were hyping a ni-co vein in arsenides in the NWT. Well he knew quite a bit about the ammonia leach process that could tackle these type of ores. He thought he could promote it but he was about 1 million tons and 15 feet wide short in his engineering. Too bad. I like a good fight. A lot of you guys are investors. You have never worked in the field. Well a lot who have who look at IPMCF shake their heads. Nooo way baby. It don't fit. Too far out. I did not fall out of turnip truck. I went to school to learn mining. And we did not take 1890 methods. We studied in situ leaching and open pit mining of low grade gold and modern assay methods 20 years ago. And it is the business of the mining professional to stay current, so you read the Mining Journal and the CIM bulletins and go to symposiums and talk to PhD's and mill superintendants and mine managers. 20 years down the line with science and math as your tools you can figure a few things a la energy equations and add up just whether what you are hearing is possible or nay. A healthy skepticism is I have found a good thing. When Delgratia started talking about their fabulous assays and 1000 foot intersections and holes 1000 feet apart and a light bulb popped. I went on the net and after reading that good PhD's reports I called him a thief a liar. I said without a moment's checking into it that it was a salt job. I was right. How did I know without flying down to the State and taking check assays? Well, a little bird told me. Chirp f*****G chirp. I asked John Kaiser, the dean of California small cap mining pundits what he thought about IPMCF. He said that he thought it was a religion. mailto:echarter@vianet.on.ca

To: d:oug who wrote (34027)	9/7/1998 9:54:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Respond to of 35569

Paunch. I will echo what Eric charters says. Sinc Thall, myself and Eric own no shares we can be impartial. Shareholders see an impartial and negative comment as an attempt to take their money away from them with calumny. This is incorrect. Eventually the mine will work or not work and make or not make money and the shares will settle to their proper value. In this case they have settled to a fraction of a dollar. It is quite possible for a group of investors to hype a stock all by themselves into a high and false value. negative comments actually help as they defeat the fake hype. If you have a crooked group helping the hype for their own crooked reasons you get an even higher value, followed by a catastrophic fall. In the case of IPM from near $20 to a few pennies. Another stock with actuall proven reserves in Timmins had a range from just under 10 cents to about 40 cents. That is Moneta Porcupine mines(ME-Toronto). They have never been in the grip of any crooked promoters and they rise or fall on merit alone. I am sure they will kick back up to 30-40 cents or more this year if gold jumps. ANother is Royal Oak, (RYO-Toronto) Now well under $1, they could turn around like a scared cat if Kemiss boosts their income this quarter. Another is StAndrew(SAS Toronto), a producing mine around $2, could be worth $6-20 ina few years. These are all honest miners/explorers with near zero promotion or hype. I own zero shares of all three and have no connection with them at all. However if some hype appeared and they semed to get into some chicanery I would ask hard questions there. So bear in mind that being sick is wanting to cling to a false(provable false) reality. If you prove that IPM has precious in good amounts I will admit error but I will not run on hearsay. Were the claims paid for before the end of August? or restaked? Bill