International Precious Metals (IPMCF) | Stock Discussion Forums

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
International Precious Metals (IPMCF)

An SI Board Since September 1996

Posts	SubjectMarks	Bans	Symbol
35569	56	0	IPMC

Emcee: Daniel M. Whipple	Type: Unmoderated

Introduction Market Data Compact

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):

Reply	Message Preview	From	Recs	Posted
34144	After all these months...you say...that you were talking Naxos and not IPM? Sor	Chuca Marsh	-	9/11/1998
34143	I don't think any metals have been <i> proved </i> to be there	E. Charters	-	9/11/1998
34142	Gads, you thought I was talking about you..no I was NOT...the Chief Holes at I	Chuca Marsh	-	9/11/1998
34141	I have never lied to you. Everything I have said on this thread is my sincere	E. Charters	-	9/11/1998
34140	You SOB...you did not get that HE TWISTED TRUTH...in realatly he lied to Paunch	Chuca Marsh	-	9/11/1998
34139	Before I talk with Paunch, a message from me to Charters and anyone else recomm	d:oug	-	9/11/1998
34138	I can offer the same thing and after the facility is built I can even wash and	go4it	-	9/11/1998
34137	Charters, Sorry to say but I couldn't trust you any further than I could th	Paunch	-	9/11/1998
34136	Perhaps I can help out here. As the mine you are thinking of acquiring has some	E. Charters	-	9/11/1998
34135	Paunch, One added thought, The new Mine would be held privately until the need	Paunch	-	9/11/1998
34134	Doug, If Ipm goes into chapter 7 the company is up for grabs, we would have to	Paunch	-	9/11/1998
34133	Continuation of my prior post to Paunch. So that I am clean in my understanding	d:oug	-	9/11/1998
34132	Paunch, I have a question, as to the difference between two outcomes. Lets say	d:oug	-	9/11/1998
34131	<<Have you noticed on this thread how all of the posters that have share	Larry Brubaker	-	9/10/1998
34130	Alan On RTQ Thomson the quote was .05, One or the other moved a decimal. Paunch	Paunch	-	9/10/1998
34129	None of it is my opinion directly, it's compiled from 1000's of posts,	ddl	-	9/10/1998
34128	Alan "MINOR"??? We just lost another 90%. <G> Dave	Char	-	9/10/1998
34127	Paunch, Another "minor" clarification. According to AOL's quote	Alan Vennix	-	9/10/1998
34126	Richard, Thanks, for the clarification . Paunch	Paunch	-	9/10/1998
34125	Paunch, <<part of Omega>> Only as a shareholder of Omega, he is no	Richard Mazzarella	-	9/10/1998
34124	Richard, You are correct, Runyon owns Maxam and is a part of Omega but they are	Paunch	-	9/10/1998
34123	Denis, <<Omega = Maxam>> Not so, how many times do I have say it?	Richard Mazzarella	-	9/10/1998
34122	Richard: My point is, why should new investors spend say, $2 million to get 25	Larry Brubaker	-	9/10/1998
34121	Denis, Would you post the paperwork to prove what you said or is like all of th	Paunch	-	9/10/1998
34120	Paunch, that's most probably because those who have sold have "snapped	ddl	-	9/10/1998

Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):