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: BGM who wrote (16376)	9/29/1998 10:36:00 AM
From: mark silvers	Respond to of 20681

Brad, I was merely noticing the timing of his "reminders". I just thought it was interesting that his last comments have come after the few times there was upward movement of any kind in the stock price. Mark

To: BGM who wrote (16376)	9/29/1998 10:36:00 AM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20681

Brad, We are all painfully aware of the unanswered questions. I think that John (if I may comment about his post) is stiring the pot. The comment about "Also if Mr. Norton is the one who precipitated the problem, I'd like to know that as well." is just an example. Where did anyone ever come to a conclusion that Mr. Norton was a "problem"? As I have posted at length, Mr. Norton came in and put Ledoux on a very narrow path of proof for the SFA testing, which Ledoux failed to prove. So please help me out here. Where does that lead to Mr. Norton "precipitating" the problem? It sounds like Mr. Norton "precipitated" a course correction avoiding a dramatically more damaging situation. One which would have been caused by a much broader market, plus our key financial partners, investing much larger sums of money based on faulty test results from Ledoux. Not only did Mr. Nortons work avoid that much grander embarrassment which could have been a final nail in the Naxos coffin, he is also a key element in offering Naxos a more traditional, more secure path out of this dark page in our history based on his credentials and experience. So why would John want to demonize John Norton? Like Mark said, he seems to want to chime in most particularly when the stock is moving up, as slight a move as it is. As always, these are just my opinions. Tom F.