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: Ron who wrote (18771)	4/27/1999 4:38:00 PM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Ron, Again, this is just discussion and my own speculation. I am certainly not an expert. However, there are a lot of assumptions in the current MG story as it has been told by the many SI denizens. "It is true J/L probably got a significant stake in MG, probably all restricted." Yes, they got a major piece of the pie(which means a major piece of the pie has a dual interest in naxos) but you have no way of knowing if it is restricted shares or not. Someone has been selling shares into the good news, as the price has not budged at all. "There really is no need to do all this third party verif, COC, etc. unless the whole process is questionable ( and continuing production will answer that),"" That is a huge assumption. Big boys willnever show up without much greater proof than a few checks from a refinery. Ask any GPGI owners if you don't believe me. Third party verification is always needed, especially with a black box process, and and evenmore so with a b.b. process with a dubious history. Also, MG has not proven anything yet. there is no idea of costs, no idea of consisitency of the ore or the process. J/L has a history of being very spotty when it comes to consistency. Again, there is no right or wrong in either of our positions, just different viewpoints. I wish you luck. mark "But the process no longer belongs to these "owners." " NO, but they have a major piece of the pie, and all involved can own a major piece of the naxos pie for no cash, only use of the process, if the current dissidents get their way. that is a huge increase in assets and makes for a greater stock play for those involved. IMO, that is plenty of motivation for a merger.

To: Ron who wrote (18771)	4/27/1999 4:49:00 PM
From: Tom Frederick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Ron, You are suffering from what many here have unfortunately already been cured of...the hard way I might add. "Nothin' but blue skies" investor fever. You don't seem to consider that J/L might not be provable. You don't see the need for third party verification. You posted "There really is no need to do all this third party verif, COC, etc. unless the whole process is questionable". My God man, were you out getting coffee or something for the last 4 years? Haven't you heard of Bre-X? IPM? DelGratia? The industry as a whole takes a whole different look at this stuff these days. Even Naxos, with a successful pilot plant producing metal every day (let's hope) will at some point need to have a third party come in to run the plant. They will scrub it down, clean it out, restart the process and run it themselves to be sure. Then a third party will have to supervise all drilling and assay around the property to have a realistic assesment of total ore tonnage. While I wish all the DD's success, it is a much healthier thing to approach it with less emotional attachement and a more critical eye. That goes for Naxos, MXAM, GPAU, all of us. Good luck, Tom F.