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 : Maxam Gold Corp. OBB:MXAM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (5895)	10/6/1998 8:27:00 PM
From: Rosie'sPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11603

Richard, Thanks for the summary. It is comforting to know that it is just Mr. Murphy working overtime on Maxam, not mismanagement, errors in judgment, or prevarication. It is also elating to be reminded by Mr. Runyon that the southwest U.S. will eventually become the precious metal capital of the world. Did he also mention when the chickens might be expected home to roost?

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (5895)	10/7/1998 7:17:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11603

Richard: As a card-carrying Maxam skeptic, I have to ask some questions about Maxam's explanations for their recent problems. I hope you don't mind <VBG>. <<The first was the COC reported in press release 05/15/98. There was a screw up with the instrumentation, all the values were bogus.>> So we are to believe that all of the 100s of assays reported to us WITHOUT COC were just fine. It wasn't until they did a COC test that all of the sudden the instrumentation went haywire? Seems a little difficult to believe. <<The next problem was the ore taken for the bulk assay. It was one of the worst areas of metal concentration on the whole property, you couldn't find a worst ore area.>> For months now, we were led to believe that Maxam had an excellent handle on the vagaries of their ore. Remember the very detailed map showing the hotspots in color on the website? Plus, all of these 100s of assays on their ore, but then they just happen to select the worst area of concentration for a bulk test? Seems a little difficult to believe. <<Next comes the reason why Maxam can't do anymore large bulk testing at the location they had the poor result. The consultant that was doing the testing wasn't going to get the required air quality permit. They weren't about to get a permit just for Maxam's work. They would have to qualify their whole operation while Maxam was only a small part of their activities>> Maxam's PR's and President's Messages led us to believe that Maxam had built a 10-tpd pilot plant, not that they were renting space at a consultant's facility. At any rate, even if this new explanation is correct, nobody realized they were going to have to get an air quality permit for testing? Also, is this statement to suggest that while Maxam is a small part of the consultant's activities, it is the ONLY part of these activities which required an air quality permit? Seems a little difficult to believe. More Maxam mumbo jumbo, IMO.

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (5895)	10/7/1998 7:52:00 PM
From: WLAVEL	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11603

<Speaking for MAXAM> <Screw up in instrumentation>...whom are you talking about, RDi procedures, Cimetta 30lb submission or Cooley/Hewlett selection of material to be sent to RDi? Cimetta's testing of the initial 600lbs of the 8,000lbs on site showed no values..It was tested before it went to RDi.... The consultants you are referring to on site at Cimetta could only have been MAXAM employees who actually were there supervising Cimetta employees in the use of MAXAM/Hewlett secret potions.... <Anybody that followed followed this company for any time knew there was something wrong with that report( RDI COC assay )> Not you buddy, you and Marsh jumped on it, predicting higher stock values, Chuca was even predicting at $3.00 per share just days after the AGM...Funny you should even bring this up since you were pretty firm in your convictions that fire assays were too conventional for todays DD's and they have a tendency to lose values during the assay process, frankly you didn't know what you were talking about..If Runyon told you this he was jiving you also...You consistantly spoke of Hewlett's patented process and secret leaching solutions that reduce the ore in 3 to 5 minutes....not realistic...yet you went on and on about mining techniques and procedures that you believed to be hi-tech stuff.... <Next problem was ore taken from bulk assay>< worst areas of metal concentration on the whole property>...Do you admit then that everything MAXAM/Runyon/Hewlett have stated over the last year has been a lie....Hewletts 1,000 assays...hundred of leach tests, 500 million dollars in proven reserves and millions more in probable reserves....Drilling at down to 99 feet etc...with values recovered at such and such depths......were has all the hard work gone?.Why would the COC material be taken from the worst part of the claims?...It is inconceivealbe that you would pass on such b/s when the COC is the very issue that could make or break any outside financing...Don't tell me that someone from Cimetta came out to the Peoria 7 mine and just took out 8,000 lbs of material from a known unproductive part of the mine.. Friend, if Runyon told you this he is in the wrong business and so are you for trying to pass it on...By the way, Electron-microprobe not used to assay material, helps, but fire is the only way to show the ore is legally there. <You can go from high metal concentrations to nothing in just few feet> True statement...how is it now that this wonderful mine which up until now was homogenous and all material was just laying all over the place, has now been found concentrated in Paleo-channels....How in the hell could Hewlett have made these fantastic proven ore reserves and probable estimates if he didn't know where the ore bodies were.? I figure he based this information on superior skill and knowledge and the proof of 1,000 fire assays , 15,000 soil samples, hundreds of leach tests, Geo-physics testing with a Magnetometer etc...WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO THIS DATA? <I speculate that was some of IPM problems not being able to show good assays>..What do you need for you to see the light..a brick?...Same issue IPM had good assays to start , the only reason they couldn't do the COC is that nothing showed up..The ore is not the problem,there isn't any, people are the problem... <At Cimetta the consultant doing the testing wasn't going to get the required air quality permit>...This is little hard to understand in that the consultants on hand at Cimetta were MAXAM employees...now why would one of Runyons boys not pay for Cimetta to get a permit... TELL YOU WHY.......NO PERMIT WAS EVER NEEDED BY CIMETTA....THEY NOR ANYONE FROM MAXAM EVER PUT IN A REQUEST FOR A AIR QUALITY PERMIT... CIMETTA'S OPERATION WAS TOO SMALL TO EVEN REQUIRE PERMITTING.. If you are repeating just repeating Runyon on this issue just call the Pima County office in Tucson and ask the right questions...give it a shot... <No more testing will be done there>...Hell I don't wonder why, Cimetta probably all shook up over the issues by now. If Cimetta was going to be the COC facility as MAXAM has led everyone to believe...what is it that put this company in the loop to do chain of custody testing..if they didn't have the facilities up front and their people needed to be trained...why would any financial lending institution pass out money to MAXAM based on a company with no prior history of doing COC's.... MAXAM has not yet said what happened to Kilborn....Nicols left the company sometime after May, was this a coincidence? Please stop playing around with the investors by telling them to refer to the MAXAM Technical WEB site. This information is a couple of years old by now...Are you just getting to read it?...Are the values still good, are the estimates of ore reserves any good? How the hell could this stuff be relevant if nothing has happened? People gotta do what is best for them I guess but you and Chuca have been jerking people around for a long time....it's time to tell the truth and get off telling people what a good deal DD's are.. Just for the record..You and Chuca keep slinging it and you will soon have no one to post too....how low on the chart will MAXAM go before they produce their first ounce of gold? WL You got the football Mazzarella...take a tip, stay out of the gold mines in the desert, Chuca too.. Hope this helps....

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (5895)	10/8/1998 12:24:00 AM
From: GlobalMarine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11603

<<<I also got the OK to publicly explain what went wrong with the 500lb recovery test. >>> If it were the case that the COC ore sample was bad, why doesn't the company simply dig up a 600 pound sample from a known gold zone (e.g. where all those auger drill and RC drill hole results were), fire assay it to ensure it has good gold values, dust off the idle pilot plant and run this ore through it, and if the pilot plant works, the recovery grade should approximate or exceed the fire assay grade. This would answer a lot of questions and ,move the stock price. Instead, the company wants to spend money to drill more holes, which will do nothing for the stock price because past drilling hasn't helped. Something's not right here, and potential investors and financing sources are going to be asking much tougher questions than I have. If you think I'm being judgemental, what do you think an investment bank from which Maxam wants to obtain $25 million will be like?