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.
Tight lid on it. Really? Do you thing a bunch of divers land-based find treasure and keep a lid on it. Not very likely. Thats just my opinion but based on experience. Furthermore, lid on it for what reason? I cannot see it hurting the company or its stock by posting a couple of encouraging photos. Again, thats just my opinion.
Where did you get a number the likes of 200 days? For a scattered shipwreck site as this one may prove to be, it could take years.
The study and analysis of shipwreck timber and fasteners (spikes, nails, forelock rods, etc.) is very general due to the similarity of these things through the mainly three centuries of the ships used in New World colonial commerce. A distinction regarding fittings occurred in the latter part of the 18th Century when bronze and copper spikes and round hull pins came into use. As to wood, that covers a abroad range in so much that it depends where the ship was built and the types of woods that were selected. For example, the "Atocha" of 1622 was built (lower hull) using what was called by the Spaniards "Caribbean Cedar" which was in fact Mahogany. (Atocha was built in Havana, Cuba). That of course would be distinct from a ship built of Oak in Europe. It rarely tells anything of the nationality or specific dating as the ship could have been English, French or Dutch built but later is captured or bought by the Spanish. Treasure coins, bars and specific artifacts (particularly ceramics, pipes, glass bottles (intact or broken) are the main key to dating and determining nationality. One very common factor on knowing your on a Spanish shipwreck is the presence of hundreds (if not thousands of broken pieces of earthenware "olive jars". That was my experience when we worked the 1710 "Solo Dio Gloria" in the Dominican Republic, along with some others.
wlfr01 - You state "the more wrong I become" You appear not knowing anything about the UNESCO Underwater Culture Heritage Treaty. I suggest you go on line and read it. Countries who have signed the treaty can no longer engage in contracts with private sector entities in the recovery of historic shipwrecks / treasure shipwrecks for any commercial gain whatsoever. Cuba ratified the treaty on 05/26/2008. If SFRX or another commercial entity is expressing fantasies of expectation of entering into contract for treasure salvage, forget it. There is currently only one country that signed the treaty that is allowing the continuation of treasure recovery and that is Panama. The only reason being that two wrecks were grandfathered in and agreed to by UNESCO, one being the 1631 San Joseph researched and found by Jack Haskins prior to the signing of the treaty.
When you commented that "I am found and bold", I indeed am when I know what I'm talking about. As to the shared "scuttlebutt", I conveyed this only because I was actually told such. There was a bit more but I didn't want to be accused of being the messenger of doom and gloom. Find the wreck. Find treasure and everyone should be happy. It certainly wouldn't hurt for the company to post a couple of good photos unless that contradicts Florida State contract terms. Good luck and Merry Christmas day.
That will never happen. Cuba signed the UNESCO Underwater Culture Treaty which permanently prohibits the salvage of treasure wrecks for profit.
The existence of a "Site #3" shipwreck (or parts of one) stands out as a reality. Finding the main concentration (wherever that may be) is the real issue. Timbers, some artifacts as previously found years past, along with even a cannon/s can be upper portions of a wreck. Whats important is ballast.
Are there concentrations of ballast rocks being found?. This represents lower hull and just like the blood train of a bleeding animal, it eventually leads to the source.
Waterfront "scuttlebutt" (rumors) are saying that the divers are not on thee wreck but rather a trail of timber and iron fasteners. No treasure - no artifacts of significance. The worse part perhaps is that the trail is supposedly heading towards another Florida State contractor area. For those that don't know, "scuttlebutt" is just that. Rumors.
Precisely. The state is interested in unique, possibly one of a kind historically important artifacts. So do you think it prudent that SFRX bears the responsibility to remove coral encrustations and preserve these items? If the terms of the contract are a no liability to the company (as I posted before) all well and good. Being direct, as I see it, this company in the years they've been in business, have yet to have this experience. The highly "esteemed" archaeologist the company has on payroll are not shipwreck finders and have not dealt with major divisions with the State of Florida relating to rare artifacts selected or to be selected by the State. If I'm wrong please be specific in citing the example proving otherwise. Sinclair is the only one coming close to what I'm trying to point out.
When Jim Sinclair worked full time as Conservator for Mel Fisher, Treasure Salvors "Atocha" and "Margarita" recoveries. preservation was for the company and its shareholders solely. To bear the responsibility of preservation for a state agency that issued the company the contract and also presides over the regulatory affairs of the companies full salvage operation, is not wise. Thats my opinion. If the state is exonerating SFRX from any liability for whatever might go wrong during the cleaning and preservation of their 20%, well just fine. No matter how good the preservationist team is, things can go wrong depending the state of (delicate) condition the artifact is in. Hope that recovery operations have reached the point where these things need to be of concern. Good luck.
No it is not a new concept at all. Its at least an already accepted fact that they are on the wreck site, or part of it, so they should be finding conglomerates which can be a combination of most anything. Those have to be processed. Sometimes one can readily identify the forms of whats encrusted and sometimes not. From what I learned when working on the projects in the Dominican Republic, recovering conglomerates is the norm along with individual items (artifacts, treasure, etc.) The preservation side of things is sensitive because without proper cleaning and processing, high value artifacts can be damaged or completely destroyed. In any case, SFRX should not have any responsibility/liability for processing artifacts which belong or will belong to the State. I presume they (Florida) have their own conservation facility just like the Dominicans do.
Wreck material and artifacts. What exactly? The Juno site also produced wreck material and artifacts but turned out to be a collection of trash and trinkets. SFRX had no problem displaying a copper buckle, so why not show what is meant by "wreck material and artifacts which should be proudly displayed as an assurance and appetizer for stockholders and would-be investors. This is a valid site, or at least a good trail, so what goes?
Ridiculous.
From everything I have ever heard through good sources, this site should be the real deal so why no treasure or artifact recovery to date. Is this some company secret for one reason or the other?
Telling it to you straight forward - just the way it is, when you are really on a treasure wreck, the coins and signifcant artifacts shows up quickly. Maybe not in great quantity. If there are coins found on the beach (as some attest to) then coins and other significant recoveries come quickly in the main wreck site area. I've been there, working on a treasure wreck off the Dominican Republic and always (past) playing around on 1733 galleon wrecks in the Florida Keys. I also, while on vacation, dove on one of the 1715 wrecks with Kevin McKee, son of the grandfather of all Florida treasure hunters Art McKee. On only some of those "blow hole" digs, we fond a swivel gun, some coins and some other none too significant artifacts. This was a site well worked out before. The point is you find goodies. I would only imagine that the same has to be happening on this Site #3. Perhaps SFRX has reasons why they are not disclosing this at this time.
I would venture to say that I am probably one of the few posting here that actually met Goldberg face to face in the Dominican Republic aboard the RV/Hispaniola. The man is a straight faced liar and really did the number on all of us divers. None of us got paid or air fare back to the U.S.A. This man is a master of false promises. As I said before, unless this clown has gone through some kind of liars rehabilitation program, I wouldn't trust anything (and I mean anything) his name is associated with.
Let me make this clear. Anyone with half a brain can simply look at CEO Goldberg's track record and from there on, nothing more has to be said. He is a consistent liar which can be well documented both here and in any court of law. (I hope the latter comes to be). I met this man, heard his lies face to face, and until such time when he has gone through some liars rehabilitation program, nothing he promotes is believable. So that's my opinion, quite provable by the way.
How long has INOH been pushing this scam? No revenues to date, right? Possibly wiser for the company to go back to a treasure hunting theme scam. The RV Hispaniola still sits at the dock at Ocean World Marina in Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic, non-mobile as it is now an inoperable piece of scrap the marina owners are trying to legally negotiate to be SCRAPPED now as the unpaid dockage fees approach 200K (U.S.) Its all really a sad joke. Going from treasure hunting to water makers, super light bulbs and now cancer detecting machines. Shame on you or anyone supporting this company. So Thats my opinion.
The Geometrics G-882 Cesium Magnetometer is the best in the field. I had the pleasure of working with this system, some of the hardware and particularly the off-bottom altimeter system which was designed by fellow treasure hunter Burt Webber who discovered the 1641 Spanish Galleon "Concepcion". He also converted this magnetometer into a diver operated on-the-bottom anomaly pin-point-unit. As I leaned, its not just using this remote sensing instrumentation but its also someone professionally able to interpret the anomalies. Does the G-882 SFRX purchased unit have the off-bottom altimeter option? If not, they are lacking. Its not just buying the toys but also how to use them.
A copper buckle for starters. Two more items to go, is that right?
Yes, you are right but with one exception. Kip Wagner as a building contractor, began with lucking out with his coin finds on the beach. Start up with no experience (perhaps everyone starts that way in one way or the other), with help developed research, a team and the rest is history documented in many books. Mel Fisher came into the quest for the Atocha in quite a different way. He had started with two trips to Silver Bank in search for the 1641 Concepcion (later found by Burt Webber) and then joined with Kip Wagner working some of the 1715 wrecks.The Fisher quest for the 1622 fleet was based on dedication and professional research done by a (low profile - real academic) researcher named Eugene Lyons. Many professionals question why it took so many years to find the Atocha but Fisher was a chaser of rainbows, which doesn't matter, bottom line is he found it.
As to SFRX, in my opinion, its so far been a piggy back ride on wrecks others had already found and worked. There is allot of flaunting of the "Dr. DeBry says" which doesn't impress me for one. Not meaning DeBry hasn't dove and acquired experience on 1715 wrecks. Is that really the best shot of sound credibility posters here can make? Short of ones own impressively created web-site, I look at what creditable books have been written by creditable authors about that persons history, achievements and discovery. Please give me a referral in that respect to DeBry?. If you review my number of previous posts I have done here, I am a supporter of SFRX, now dedicated effort on this Site #3 because I believe it has substance and may turn out a winner. To compare SFRX with their come-on approach to the industry to the likes of Kip Wagner or Mel Fisher doesn't seem to be justified. Let all do your own due diligence and thus make fair judgement.
"A picture is worth a thousand words" So why no pictures? I previously backed this Site #3 with my own sincere opinions. Still do. I've dove treasure wrecks before (already worked out) and its never been an issue for recovering a number of coins and interesting artifacts. So with all these weeks/months of serious effort by this company, why no disclosed results? I've seen the photo of a copper buckle, why nothing else of support and encouragement? So what's the big secret? So again, "a picture is worth a thousand words. On this posting site a thousand words plus seems to never be a problem on a daily basis. So the pictures please for everybody sake.
"Looking at the prior findings" What prior findings and by who? As I stated before, a picture is worth a thousand words. I'm sure one legitimate photo of "prior findings" might possibly make allot of people happy.
Words are words but as the old saying goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words". So why no pictures? Apparently no problem putting a photo of a copper buckle on the company website, so why not some of the coins allegedly found? I believe a valid photo of coins found would be exciting for everyone.
Coins on the beach? Prove it. Are you aware that same story went along with the Lantana site too? Not saying it was posted by SFRX but the rumor circulated for years. While talking about coin rumors, why haven't any photo's ever been posted of the alleged few coins picked up at the Juno wreck? Out of general and historic interest, I do believe many people would like to see those.
Never said he was any new consultant. He's suppose to be coming back as a member of their dive team. Apparently he worked for Kyle Kennedy before. The guys name is Glen Ridgley, who is known to have worked on a number of the 1715 wrecks with a number of old timers, Roy Volk or Volkner, Duke Long, Johnny Barrier and Keith Webb on 1622 Margarita". What I've heard but cannot support as absolute fact.
Tonight I have heard what may prove to be very good news for you people (assuming its true). Sfrx is to have brought into the play a veteran 1715 shipwreck pro who has not only "worked" (not talked about it for a consulting check) a number of those sites with renowned old timers but has actually been on this Site #3 wreck and probably knows as much about it as any body. Not only that but he and members of his family are cash on the barrel head investors in this company. Although I have never worked with him, I know who this guy is. He knows his stuff from magnetometer surveys, metal detecting, reading and discerning the signs and can sniff out the trails. I'm told he's to be coming in to the picture this coming week. This is just what I have heard and what I say here is solely my opinion, so give this a chance to work.
Sorry, but there's an old saying among hunters. "This dog don't hunt". Enough words of how great thou art, just produce results. This is supposedly a real site or at least the start of a good trail, now real pros. (everybody is a great diver) need to figure it out. Poor visibility for pro-divers should be no problem. That's what good underwater metal detectors are about. I have been there and its not easy.
So what? I've dove nearly all the 1733 fleet shipwrecks in the Florida Keys. That doesn't make me a treasure finder. If picking up a few coins from some of these wrecks now and then through the years makes me a "professional" treasure finder then I suppose thats what I am. I know Jim Sinclair and respect his reputation for what he is but flaunting names doesn't find treasure. Working a shipwreck is never an easy task but the bottom line is if your on a winning wreck there got to be some results. Perhaps there have been and they're not disclosed yet?
Apparently there's no material, is there? Professional "divers" - great but this company needs professional treasure hunters/treasure finders which seems to be lacking. Its not a question this should be a good wreck site, and if so, why no proven results?
watchingsum: The sad truth is this is a treasure hunting company that in five years + or - hasn't found a lick of treasure. My question has always been and still is why a supposedly serious new treasure hunting company launched there debut on an, over and over, proven folly lie the Juno Beach wreck? The disappointing fact is that at least one of their paid archaeological consultants already knew this. Posting here in the past, I stated my opinion as to the Juno B. wreck. There was allot of offensive opposition to my opinion but the facts/results speak for themselves. For what I know (via persons that know) I have posted supportive hope for this current effort on this Site #3. So my problem is why is a brass buckle the only thing that is posted by this company. Nothing else to actually support and encourage investment? I read about the hype of three boats altogether in the same spot which would appear encouraging but on the other hand is this the wagons circling with nothing better to do while a Site #4 is possibly being produced? These are my questions and MY opinion.
A brass buckle??
Lets be clear, the research and evidence you refer to existed and was public knowledge for a very long time in books written by Carl Clausen (past Fla.State Marine Archaeologist) and Robert Burgess. This is nothing new. Both of these high reputation people "consulting" to SFRX are who they are in there own specialized areas but they are not wreck hunters/finders, or on the bottom, follow the scatter trail experts. If that were the case then explain why the Juno Beach wreck proved a "bust". Weren't they part of the "consulting" team then". This site #3 is obviously real, at least to the extent that its part of a wreck but its going to take experienced pros. topside and on the bottom to figure this out and come up with the pay dirt. Thats just my opinion.
A very common sense post capted. To date allot of "go" but up to today, no show. Site #3 is apparently real but who is doing the survey and on bottom assessments (follow the trail)?. The paid pros. are not treasure wreck survey and identification experts. In all due respect they are what they are. Researchers and conservationists. Show me one published book written about them (not by them) that proves otherwise.
What you say rings true, hard work, diligent effort. The bottom line is results which, to now appear to be lacking.
You might want to keep in mind they were tagging multiple "trash and trinket" finds on the Juno Beach wreck which (may) account for the number on the buckle. Possibly so. I said it before and now again, its odd to put ones foot forward with the display of a buckle but nothing else to encourage stockholders and wet new and further investment appetites.
Rather difficult to understand why SFRX can post a photo of a tagged brass buckle but nothing else if in fact other things are being found? I guess the question is are they actually on a main part of the wreck (ballast, timbers, etc.) or part of a trail. As is historically proven, trails take time and experienced treasure divers to prove them out.
With the apparent efforts being made by the SFRX dive teams, positive recoveries should be made, if not already. That said, its rather sad when in the course of five years, the only photos (like these) to be posted are of things someone else has found. Should prove exciting and beneficial to the SFRX stock position when they start showing their own. Best of luck which I believe is needed.
I do believe my point was missed here. I mean no disrespect to ex-military or law enforcement divers who were professionally trained to do what they do. In the world of treasure hunting, either you have the experience or you don't as to knowing how to discern scatter trails on the bottom and knowing what relates to Spanish colonial shipwrecks. Few do. I've been on a couple of these similar projects with real pros. so I do believe I know what I'm saying. As the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding, hopefully that will come soon.
Divers are divers and all you cite; ex-military divers, law enforcement divers, Navy Seals,etc., etc. etc. don't make them treasure divers. that's a special breed in itself. (time and experience) So, I guess what I'm telling you is trained divers in itself is non impressive.
"The more sites KK secures" . Securing new treasure bearing shipwreck sites is not like walking through the apple orchard picking ripe apples. They're far and few between. In my opinion SFRX will have to produce where they are on site #3 (which is realistic). There just aren't many apple trees with ripe fruit hanging on the lower limbs anymore. Good luck.
What kind of business is SFRX in. Litigation or finding treasure? So what is the current status? A copper belt buckle and what else? I'm sure all want to know while this stock seems to be heading for the cellar. Facts are facts, finds are finds. Put them on the table. Everyone posted like this was a slam dunk deal once you got on site. Certainly hope it turns out that way.....Soooooon.