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: Tom Frederick who wrote (16566)	10/7/1998 1:19:00 PM
From: Kim W. Brasington	Respond to of 20681

FOR: NAXOS RESOURCES LTD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT INVESTOR RELATIONS: Jeff Sharp (913) 894 - 8509 Russell Smith (603) 891 - 5743 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE #98-26 Vancouver, British Columbia – October 7, 1998 - Naxos Resources Ltd (O.T.C. Bulletin Board: NAXOF), announced today that it has withdrawn the offering of shares of its subsidiary, Naxos Resources (U.S.A.) Ltd., effective immediately, due to lack of sufficient demand for the offering and Shareholder opposition. ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY NAXOS RESOURCES LTD “Signed” Sidney W. Kemp President All forward-looking statements made by Naxos involve material risks and uncertainties and are subject to change based on factors beyond Naxos' control. Accordingly, Naxos' future performance and financial results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in any such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, without limitation, those described in Naxos' filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Naxos does not undertake to publicly update or revise its forward-looking statements even if experience or future changes make it clear that any projected results expressed or implied therein will not be realized.

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (16566)	10/7/1998 1:21:00 PM
From: GlobalMarine	Respond to of 20681

Press release out today. Naxos has withdrawn the Naxos USA offering due to lack of interest and shareholder opposition. Sorry Sid, I know you wanted to get FL out of your hair, but it looks like you're joined at the hip, married for life, no divorce allowed, forever and ever, nag nag nag...

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (16566)	10/7/1998 1:32:00 PM
From: Donald E. Aken	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Tom, who will finance continued operation? It is not like this will disappear off my radar screen and less risk would be worth more money. If something begins to go right there would be plenty of time to jump back in if only to play the volatility. Actually only Mrs. Howell could ease my pain at this point. ;-)

To: Tom Frederick who wrote (16566)	10/7/1998 2:57:00 PM
From: Neal davidson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Tom: I will take a stab at your survey... (1) Your choices a and c are essentially the same. However, whether the correct answer is a, b or c, we are basically screwed, in my opinion. (2) You left out the correct answer: d- all of the above (3) My answer to question 3 is d, which should read as follows: "I would not believe the JL results, as I would intellectually realize that they were non-repeatable bullshit, but I would exploit the resulting hype and sell into the rally." We are all out a lot of money, some more than others, and we need to sue the hell out of Ledoux assuming we, as individuals, can bring a claim. I hope there are investors who are willing to participate in the litigation, which will mean coughing up some cash to cover litigation expenses (nothing is free, you know). I also think that Naxos should immediately file suit against Ledoux. There is no reason to hold off, just in the hopes that Blumberg will testify in our favor at the hearing. Here is why: (1) By the time he testifies, our stock likely will be worthless and (2) If Blumberg does not want to testify voluntarily, we can subpoena him. We put him under oath, show him the results he certified and ask him to confirm that he did, in fact, certify them. (The lawyers should also take advantage of his being under oath and ask him how he explains Ledoux's fuck up). Then Naxos argues that they were reasonable in relying on the results and publishing said results. If Naxos is going to try to convince the ASC that there is gold at FL, that is a useless tactic, as there presently is no proof. There was, however, a good-faith basis for Naxos to claim that there was gold: Blumberg said so. It is precisely those assertions which are the basis for Naxos' claim against Ledoux as well as our individual claims against Ledoux. I should add that I do not think that all the shareholders have individual claims against Ledoux. Each shareholder would have to show that they purchased shares in reliance on the certified assay results. This would be easiest for those who purchased the last PP, which was issued after Ledoux released its 98 results. Other shareholders might be able to claim that they would have sold at a higher price but for the certified assay results, which results caused them not to sell, but in my opinion, that is a more difficult claim to win. In light of these difficulties, as well as other considerations, the bottom line is that Naxos, the entity, has the best claim, and it should be pursued immediately. If the claim has been released, then we need to be told that now, as that would give rise to other claims. Neal p.s. With regard to Blumberg being forced to testify at the hearing, I am assuming that Naxos would be able to subpoena Blumberg to the hearing. Most administrative hearings grant subpoena powers to the parties. The fact that it is in Canada could, however, create a problem.