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: ShoppinTheNet who wrote (16953)	11/16/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Mr. Shop, As I understand it, Naxos has about $1million plus whatever they get for the sale of the Venezuela property. They also have minimal high salaries as of now. And if they can maintain the burn rate of say, the same $20,000 to J/L to keep the testing going, plus the mix of smaller salaries they still do have, even at $40,000 a month, they have at least 2 years to go before the well runs dry. For now, it's not just how much money is in the till, but how many options they have for success. Right now, we are on one property only. So the only multiple is the number of assay/recovery options they are using to see what FL has to offer. I have heard others say there are actually several methods being used. But look at it this way. There is only one goal, and they can spend the money is a variety of ways to get there. But here is the goal. Prove to the mining and investing community there are PM's in economic grade and that it can be recovered economically. Even after the whole Ledoux debacle, there is a core of people who remain confident that there are PM's in FL. We are not privy to why they think there is still a chance. We can only go by the dozens and dozens of assays have all seen the published results on that show PM's in varying degrees, but with quite varying results when repeated. The goal will only be reached with repeatable, reliable test results. If they can leapfrog into recovery, the timetable is shortened. So, with the limited money, if they have the chance to spend it more quickly, but on recovery that might be an option because recovery would be final proof. Then it doesn't matter what anyone says about this or that method. YOu put in dirt on one end and precious metals come out the other end. If they go the route of multiple labs getting consistant results, even with non standard methods, also good. But it would still need to be brought to production to prove that the metals are recoverable in similar concentrations. And then finally, the economics of it still need to be proven. So the burn rate for R&D keeps us going for maybe two years. If they choose one method above all, the money goes quicker but on a promising conclusion. And no matter how long we want the money to last, the only value that money has to any stockholder is to spend it proving the PM's are there. If you are new to this...well, put it this way. Start reading at post #1 from Jerard Pearson and by the time you get to this post, don't worry the price won't have moved anywhere, and you'll have a lot more information to base your investment decision on. Just my opinions though. Tom F.