SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Golden Eagle Int. (MYNG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: E. Charters who wrote (16055)2/6/1999 2:49:00 AM
From: David A. Wilson  Respond to of 34075
 
E. CHARTERS.......MR. DOOM & GLOOM....why don't you go visit the SUNR thread for a while...................They need some cheering up.

DAVE



To: E. Charters who wrote (16055)2/6/1999 8:41:00 AM
From: sunset  Respond to of 34075
 
into everybodys life a pessimist must appear and your it.let me say i feel it BIG BIG BIG>



To: E. Charters who wrote (16055)2/6/1999 8:53:00 AM
From: Tim Davies  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 34075
 
it would need to be so big as to throw out all the rules regarding production economics. some thing that can go to the next generation in term of cost of recovery, sa half the cost of traditional mines..
anything over 40 to 50 million oz could see huge economies of scale.
i have see some estimates that other methods become viable at these levals, and cost drop by 30 to 50 percent



To: E. Charters who wrote (16055)2/6/1999 3:03:00 PM
From: MilesM  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 34075
 
Mr. Charters, now you are just being cynical.(SP?) LOL But, I completely agree with your philosophy. Just because the SEC thought the numbers were too big, dosent mean the numbers were fake. Consider this, GE released very tiny numbers, stock climbs, real numbers come out, shareholders sue and go nuts because the company did not fully disclose the full potential of the property. SEC would be all over them like a fat kid on a smartie.

But very good analogy!!!

MM