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: Max Haber who wrote (16448)	10/1/1998 5:55:00 PM
From: SER	Respond to of 20681

I Have Had ENOUGH, I bought NAXOS for FL. I spent a lot of money based on COC numbers released by NAXOS over the past several years. What about the false COC numbers from Ledoux? What action is the company taking on behalf of my investment? What about all of us who increased our holdings and paid over 4 bucks a share when Ledoux released consistently FALSE SFA ‘98 yields. I will contact my lawyer tomorrow to start legal action against this Naxos. The way we as share holders have been treated is inexcusable. We have been lied to and our entire investment has been deluded. NOW the company that has taken my hard earned money wants me to sell for less to buy something I already bought. For those who would like to join me in this LEGAL ACTION please send me a private E-mail to (ser@mediaone.net). I will call my attorney in the morning to set a course of action. I would rather pay my attorney than buy into this BULL. This is Bull Shi! SER

To: Max Haber who wrote (16448)	10/2/1998 9:43:00 AM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Max, check your time lines and events again. CPM group came in on the premise that SFA was the only method of testing they were interested in seeing. Otherwise, if FL as a property was their main interest, why didn't they get a very large checkbook out and pay for a pilot plant to be brought on line immediately? It was because SFA did not work...again. So after this failure of the ONLY property Naxos had to offer at the time, why did CPM Group stick around? Read on. To quote the August 5 release..."As our financial advisory and investment banker, CPM has conducted a thorough due diligence of our Company so they can advise us of the best alternatives available to build the Company. In their opinion, one of Naxos' major assets is the operating experience that we possess. They recognize that perhaps our most important accomplishment during the past two months was the addition of several highly qualified technical professionals. CPM is particularly impressed with John Norton our Director of Mining Operations and Jeremy Ison our Senior Process Engineer" Now you can say that Sid was making it all up which would be a serious legal problem, misrepresenting material information to shareholders, OR you can accept that CPM is on board to help Naxos broaden it's base and invest in additional properties where they have confidence in their ROI. And that translates to known properties with proven reserves and the personnel to operate them profitably. No one has to like the decision to split up Naxos in this way. Just point your criticism where it makes sense. And the CPM argument holds water quite well thank you. Tom F.