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: Chuca Marsh who wrote (6389)	11/3/1998 4:05:00 AM
From: go4it	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11603

ok chucabud, I realized that I am getting my metrics and English standards screwed up. I stand corrected.

To: Chuca Marsh who wrote (6389)	11/3/1998 8:29:00 AM
From: Chuca Marsh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11603

Chuck1abud, rightAU!!! RESULTANTS of $ signs in the final calc sould BE OUNCES of Gold and each of the two lines of FIGURES ( ha- like 1.6 mill bucks should be 300 times that is the future! Just for a quarter of Peoria 7 @ 160 acres down to 100 feet) should be doubled to the 64 Million ton Comparison, this is signifcent ...in error...in a word ...then one MULTPLIES/THEOUNCES/BYTHE/RATEPER/OUNCE- ie POG. Price of Gold left out of the equation. When the recovery PERCENT PER TON we best talk about that detail then, I am sorry I brought this up; here we go again, CHUCADECIMAL problem rides again!( IF we actually are singing in the Blue Rain !) And, we then will hold Jack Kellys umbrella- UPSIDE DOWN!!! ! That is - atleast- a FACT, Jack. Chucaupt2