Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Aren't recovery permits issued on the basis of something to actually recover? Just asking.
In my own opinion, the hope and prayer for this company is where they are. Tangible. Just follow the trail. As to the Juno site - "And the band played on".
Diving of course but you need a actual wreck site too. Follow the trail if capable.
It's like most of the posts here are about the anticipated Christmas presents when it might help if you had a Christmas tree first all. Get it?
Now its said this ship was armed with 44 iron cannon and the accountability on this particular site is but one, and the mag search produced no more? My opinion only, there's some serious expanded survey work to be done.
The Juno wreck was a looser before they ever got there, is a looser now and probably always will be. The salvation of this company appears to be the fabled site #3 and that's why they're there. That has hope although there appears to be no evidence of this being a real verified actual wreck site. Follow the trail. This is only my opinion.
So are you saying they're salvaging all that treasure without a salvage permit or Florida state agent/s on board?
Addressing ships ballast, how right you are by your referrals. I have dove most of the Spanish shipwrecks of the 1733 fleet scattered throughout the Florida Keys. These galleons had carried just as much treasure as the 1715 fleet but the only major difference being most did not sink violently and thus were mostly intact and near thoroughly salvaged. Point is that each site is represented by BIG ballast piles. None of the known Spanish treasure shipwrecks (main site) are devoid of ballast rocks; period. It was not uncommon when the ship was built to pour in "basket ballast" (small rocks between the frames) with sometimes even mortar mix. On top of that came the larger ballast rocks, the weight being essential for the ship to maintain a low center of gravity because of the high free-board and high masts carrying strained wind blown sail. If a galleon of 500 tons plus displacement was carrying say 100 tons of treasure, why move ballast? True, there were cases where ballast was sometimes removed from certain vessels in port. The bricks of Williamsburg, Virginia came over as a ballast/cargo. The Atocha of 1622, with all its treasure aboard, has a ballast pile.
In my opinion its out of place to try and come up with all kinds of speculative excuses as to why this particular "section of wooden wreckage" is thus far devoid of ballast.Like capted (and I) have previously posted, there's oe sure sign of a Spanish shipwreck site: ballast (normally creek bed rock) and broken olive jar shards all over the place. Any here yet? If the no ballast theory was even remotely correct, explain why, in its place, there aren't stacks of tons of silver and gold bars, chests of coins concentrated and scattered all over the presumed site? Here again, as capted accurately pointed out, there are powerful boat-operated (and diver) deep penetrating ferrous/non-ferrous metal underwater detection systems that can be applied and, cutting-to-the-chase,will tell one if there are quantities of precious metals there.
I am not trying to rain on anyones parade as this is undoubtedly part of what could be a 1715 shipwreck but I just believe there isn't yet enough evidence to label it as thee shipwreck site. That's my opinion.
Contradiction. To date there appears to be no proven certainty that they are on a WRECK SITE. That of course depends on what your definition of a wreck site is. A part of a wooden shipwreck that may very well be a piece of break away flotsam with a scant sprinkling of artifacts is not by professional definition a WRECK SITE. Having been on wreck sites before, this is my conclusion - my opinion. Follow the trail.
Believe it or not but my sentiments exactly. I was about to write a similar post. No guessing necessary.
Proper spelling is Concepcion, not Conception.
Straight forward factual post.
Sorry but that just doesn't wash. I'm very familiar with the WWII iron pick ups. One of the major companies that worked the Florida Keys right on up the eastern seaboard was a Miami based company - Hemstead & Macgraph (not sure of the spelling). That said, they picked up shallow water cannons off of many the 1733 fleet wrecks (when accessible) and "da. da" a number of the 1715 wrecks. Even so, isn't it strange that there still remained some iron cannon's on most of these wrecks? I could actually list them, particularly the Florida Key sites. Now here we are at a potential wreck site in (I assume of 45 feet of water) with very limited visibility but they just knew where the cannons were and without magnetometers, blowers to uncover them (before the advent of SCUBA diving equipment, they just removed all of the cannons. OPINION - Don't think so. Reality is reality.
Perhaps thats the right word "ponder". Like CaptEd questioned in a recent post; any olive jars or broken shards? My question also before, plus the biggie; any ballast stones? Wood (portions of a broken ship) floats. Thats how the cannon and couple of artifacts got there. That is not uncommon. The, what I call the "Jack Haskins" wreck on the Pacific side of Panama ("San Joseph" 1631), the recently found break away section of that wreck was supposedly like seventeen miles away from the main wreck site. Jim Sinclair knows the exact distance as he has dove the more recently found section. From my perspective a big piece of probably decking is nothing to warrant believing the actual wreck is found. If so there should be coins, artifacts and including lots of broken olive jars and BALLAST all over the place. Hope that comes soon or you "just ain't there yet". Well, thats my opinion.
How do you think "a" cannon got there? Where's the ballast? Parts of decking float, sometimes long distances. Thats not just my opinion but a proven fact in many shipwreck profiles.
Facts. Where are they? A real artifact, treasure producing shipwreck site or shipwreck related recoveries of fragments of timber and conglomerates of iron objects? I'm not making a statement. I'm simply asking the question. Follow the trail. In my opinion you are not there yet. A hundred yards or ten miles, you're not there yet. My opinion. Do you mind?
It usually starts with actually having a genuine treasure and artifact producing shipwreck site first regardless what its name may prove to be. I don't see evidence that has happened yet, or has it? If so, whats the evidence? Know how to follow the trail.
Would you please tell me how you come to the conclusion that "they have a nice wreck down there". The only thing publicly known thus far is two plates and a pistol found years ago plus a single cannon, some pieces of wood and iron conglomerates of sort, on the bottom in that area. That definitely associates to a wreck, of course, but cannot be concluded as being "thee" wreck site. On the projects I've been on, I've seen these situations before. What has been seen/found so far is valid evidence there is a wreck, hopefully nearby. So thats just my opinion.
I have seen the photos of the pates posted here numerous times before. I have addressed this very issue here before in specific detail. That is, the plates are a reality as is the name recognizable on the plates. Simply, to connect the dots, isn't it common sense that if research has produced that name being a passenger on the 1715 "Concepcion", that segment evidence would be posted here to the benefit of shareholders and would be investors? There would be no further question. While on the subject of photos, I for one don't recall seeing one encouraging photo of anything of significance having been recovered from this site to date. Is that a secret too? I read constant posting about diving but I believe its time to reapply the remote sensing survey tools and find the wreck. Well, thats just my opinion. Good luck.
No doubt in your mind. Really? Tell me what substantiates that?
Let me tell you how it is. I personally met Goldberg and well know the person he is. A lying scam artist. If Goldberg is in any way a part of this new scheme, well then the bottom line is CRAP. Money lost. When this clown pays me and all of the rest of my diver comrades what he owes us, I might believe he's a candidate for a liars rehabilitation program, at the least.
Scaglione has been released from jail for quite some time now. He is supposedly working as a para-legal for some Miami law firm but is able to renew his attorney status with the Florida Bar after four or five years. That's what I have heard.
First it might help if you actually have a shipwreck site. As someone who has just a little bit of experience in the field, I see no evidence of that yet. My posts are intended to be constructive not destructive. In my opinion, some serious survey work has to be done, expanding from where the first positive evidence was found; the plates, the pistol, a cannon, etc. Good luck. Go get it. Its out there somewhere. I believe I suggested before; plate with name + supposed passenger list with same name = identity. Why the reluctance to simply do that? If I understand this correctly, SFRX has a contract with the State of Florida, so assuming a treasure wreck is found, based on what you say, isn't it logical that Spain would also go after Florida?
The plate is a fact. Everything else you have to say are assumptions, none of which to date can be proven. If SFRX divers have't been able to bring up anything worthy to date, how can anyone believe divers are going to go out and simply dive in 40 to 50 feet of water with poor visibility and pick up treasure or anything else for that matter. The plate and the supposed passenger list document is a fast way to the truth. Thats my point of view plain and simple.
When I post here I honestly try to be fair and factual. All of you optimistic posters keep soothing each other with "when the weather gets better". There was never any confirmation of a Site 3 actual wreck site when the weather was good. If to the contrary, why hasn't the state issued an actual salvage contract yet? I make a suggestion. Numerous times I have seen the posting of the photographs of the plates found by Heartland. These appear to be State of Florida inventory photographs. As the story goes, according to the research of DeBry, the name inscribed on the plates was a passenger on the 1715 "Concepcion". That presents a very simple process. The State of Florida validates said name on the pates and research expert DeBry produces the actual copy of the documentation validating this same person as being on the said passenger list, and I believe the stock would make a "Mount Everest" climb. That's just my opinion. Any problem with that? Come good weather keep a professional survey going with experienced people. Diving, per say, is only part of it. Good luck.
From what I can see, the line is in the water and there just aren't no fish. Come good weather; establish and follow the trail.
Good diving - sea conditions along with the concentrated efforts being made should then tell all. I still believe some further survey work lies ahead. Just my opinion.
After five years, anytime soon should have been yesterday. Are they on the wreck or are they not? So why no photos? Just asking.
Yep (as you put it) I'm the same poster that addressed Cuba before. You say "but the treaty was ratified as a founding member nation before Castro took over". This is not an issue of a founding member of UNESCO proper. This is an issue of specifically the UNESCO Underwater Cultural Heritage Treaty.
I kindly suggest you re-check your facts as they are not correct. Castro took power in 1959. The UNESCO Underwater Cultural Heritage Treaty was established November 2, 2001. Cuba signed (ratified) the treaty on May 26, 2008. Here again I suggest you actually read the treaty. The bottom line is no private sector contracting as relating to any sort of commercial distribution and intended profit gain from recovered material (artifacts/treasure). A country cannot simply rescind their participation without undoubtedly going through the International Court of Justice -Hague, Netherlands. Cuba does not have an open-door to Gringo treasure hunters or any others. Sound facts plus opinions. Check out the facts.
The sites announced so far have not proved productive so apparently DeBry has not contributed very much in my opinion. Keep in mind there are other creditable researches and professional treasure hunting entities who have the same goals in mind. Nothing new and no rabbits to pulled out of the hat. Outside of the U.S., the few countries that haven't yet signed the UNESCO Underwater Culture Heritage Treaty don't just grant exclusive contracts to entities that have no success credentials. Granted you can't achieve much when sea conditions are what they are during these winter months. Survey work is restricted and divers are limited as to what they can achieve. On the other hand, when you are actually "ON a wreck", treasure and artifacts are recovered even with limited dives. In my opinion, extended survey should be on the agenda when the sea conditions improve.
Now thats a really interesting conglomerate but apparently not a SFRX find. I would think it time to post some of their own finds.
In all fairness let me say that my opinionated comments are based only on limited disclosure of information and as I had said before "scuttlebutt" rumors that I pick up on on occasion. My comments are not meant to imply that this company does not have good divers who are making best efforts possible. What I am rendering is the opinion that if in fact they were on "thee" wreck site, coins and exciting artifacts would be showing up with little doubt and I would imagine the trumpets would be blaring from the mountain tops. Why not? When concentrations of ballast (and more cannon) begin to appear along with the so typical associated material (treasure and artifacts), then there's certainly good reason to be enthusiastic. That should all come in due time if the trail is properly discerned. Again, good luck. I'd like to see this mystery solved.
Diving is diving. Finding treasure is another thing. When you're on a treasure wreck, flat out, you know it. I'd say its time.
Curious. Do you have an AGI reference number to support this manifest statement? If in fact this particular ship was carrying this huge amount of silver coinage and the site #3 is in fact this particular shipwreck, silver coins should be scattered far and wide. Like spill out from broken salt and pepper shakers. Up to this winter, have the SFRX divers found any coins? Did the Heartland group (past) ever find any verifiable coins? Obviously theres allot of serious "follow a trail" survey work to do as I for one seriously question whether they are actually on any main portion of the wreck yet.
What capted already pointed out, I was about to ask. If the cannon was lying above the clay, that tells allot. Consultation with an experienced geologist may well answer your question regarding the clay and how long its been there as a strata.
You say "I bet SFRX already knows all this equipment is not going to work" Really? In my opinion based upon their track record over the last five years, they appear to know little. Experience comes from hands on application with supervision from credited specialists with whatever particular remote sensing technology being applied. If you are referring to to Sinclair or DeBry as the paid experts, sorry to inform you, these two are not remote sensing experts in the specialized categories of magnetometry, side-scan sonar or sub-bottom profiling. As contract m. archaeologists, let them have their credits due whatever they may be. You write "I bet the advise they pay for".....(SFRX). In my previous post, I provided you with some of the best general advise you're going to get as to sub-bottom profile application and it didn't cost SFRX one single dime. So, as the saying goes, live and learn. Good luck.
capted: I wanted to address this post before but it slipped by. When you made reference to, I believe it was a Datasonic Chirp sub-bottom profile system, the one shown in the link you provided is a very, very expensive piece of equipment.It is a technology better leased along with a trained operator for the purpose of discernment and interpretation of targets. It also requires a boat with an adequate crane or davit for safely discharging and recovering the towed instrumentation.
I once had the honor to work as a deck assistant with Earl Van Reenan of Van Reenan International, Inc.
Van Reenan is a geophysicist and leading expert in the usage of Datasonic Chirp systems and second to none in the interpretation of the sub-bottom profile data. He was once Chief Geophysicist for Dr. Harold Edgerton, MIT professor, inventor of the strobe and pioneer of sub-bottom profile systems resulting in the creation of the company EG&G. Van Reenan is up in years now but if SFRX were to consider this type of survey, I would recommend him. The survey I was involved in was off the east coast of Florida so I can share some the encountered problems.
These systems are ideal for surveys with sub-bottom geology of silt, light mud concentrations and certain (not all) types of sand. The concept of using this kind of survey for SFRX in quest of the site #3 wreck is viable but these things must be taken into consideration. Normally, before committing to the cost of such a survey, a sample core of sub-bottom material is produced and analyzed by the geophysicist to determine if the instrumentation is applicable with expectation of positive results. No, it won't penetrate clay, corals or certain types of sands. Based upon a sub-bottom geology condition of penetrable sand, the operator is looking for suspended or on sub-bottom parabolic point-source reflections, such as would be produced by a hard igneous rock ballast pile or sometimes single but more recognizable concentrations of cannons or bars of precious metals. These create parabolas like similar to the McDonald golden arches. The problem is that when encountering concentrations - coagulants of ancient dead shells and corals, the same parabolas are produced. Normally, a sensitive (Cesium) off bottom depth controlled magnetometer is towed over the position. Later the large coil ferrous/non-ferrous detector (as you addressed before although I don't agree with the range) is suspended (not towed) right over the location target. The sub-bottom profiler has already provided the depth at which the questionable target is buried.
On the previously posted subject of the Drake's silver bar, I and allot of others in this industry would love to see a photo of that bar. Undoubtedly representing the most historically famous silver bar ever recovered.
I'm very confused because the most renowned researchers regarding Spanish Colonial shipwreck history, Jack Haskins and Gene Lyons stated the Drake jettison of silver never happened. Also the story as written by Nora Sterling about the dredge recovery in the 1920's was a total fantasy. I do believe the only thing that would validate that find would be the showing of a photo of the silver bar. Haskins also had documentation validating that the Spaniards named the island Isla de Plata because of the Indians they encountered were adorned with beaten out pieces of silver and gold. Here again, such be the case with SFRX, a "picture is worth a thousand words"
Yes. It is all a process of elimination. Assuming that eventually the ultimate goal will be reached, in the process its just as important to know, methodically, where the shipwreck isn't. By the way, big anomalies don't necessarily mean treasure.
You continue to post this picture of recoveries not even made by this company which could prove misleading to persons not aware of all the facts. Good weather - bad weather, in my opinion there has been adequate time to produce evidence of an artifact or a coin if in fact they have and are on this site. It only makes one wonder if there is any substance to the "scuttlebutt" floating around. As I said before, just a few photos would do wonders for stockholders and newcomers. My opinion.
The only thing you need now is a wreck (with treasure). Still continue curious. Why no photos?