It would please me to discover that they timed the financing availability announcement with the next PR (about using it) already all but lined up.

But, every time I ever get to expecting a company in the BB world to time things as tightly as that, I end up getting scalded or by having dead money out there for an indeterminate time.

I hope thay have news other than a buyout or a merger or some such because that way, there might be continued basing support in the chart while the bigger buyout and/or merger is in the works.

Just me, of course.

Imperial Whazoo

Bear in mind people, the EXACT wording of FD pivots, in this case IMHO, on one word: NONPUBLIC

Here, to repeat the thing (emphasis added for clarity & focus):

So, Simply put:
If they put out new info, they need to be simultaneous.
If they do not put out any new info, then they could try to skate by NOT releasing any PRs simultaneously.

If they do not act simultaneously regardless of whether they actually release new info at the meeting, then they expose themselves to trouble in spades, so I seriously doubt that they will attempt to hold the meeting without a simultaneous PR.

That said, having long suffered the idiotic PR rigamarole that is typical of this company, nothing would surprise me, LOL. They might try to pull such a stunt. I hope not. And I doubt they will. But if anyone ever attempts to portray the PR track record of SFMI as "well-behaved", then.... well, enough said on that, LOL

All the PR cr%p aside, however, from a mineralization point of view, SFMI is very well endowed with precious metal resources and they have done a considerable build out that is a solid base of actual value. Lets be accurate: there is obviously considerable mineralization value here.

The question is NOT whether there is. The question is "how big".

This company will buttress the truth that there is considerable known mineralization valuation here by drilling and so forth, but IMHO, a convincing case can not be proven that people are unable to stand firmly on the conclusion that there is considerable mineralization present.

There definately is considerable mineralization present.

What drilling and all that kind of stuff will EVENTUALLY do is to make inroads into the unfinishable process of defining the actual extent of the mineralization.

IMHO, the case that argues there is NOTHING actually know is ludicrous. What is know is that this company is sitting on a gold mine (LOL). What is unknown is the extent of the value that is in the mountain and the piles and the Sinker.

To quantify the message the meeting in NY will contain, here it is, IMHO:
1.) We have a mountain with huge gold & silver in it. Attendees will be shown the historical facts that prove the mountain & Sinker tunnel are worth exploring.
2.) We wanted to prove the piles of discarded material could be processed for their mineralization & that there was enough in them to make such an endevour economically viable. We have done so.
3.) Having built a a ball mill and having proved the piles contain economically viable mineralization content, we were justified from the outset in believing that War Eagle Mountain was a one-of-a-kind North American precious metal property. By extension, the build out and successful mill operations validate our beilief that the mountain's resources are huge and that drilling (to explore & define) is worth spending the money to do.
4.) We have consolidated the ownership position on the mountain, making concerns over future intrusive claims and/or lawsuits by old property & claim holders largely irrelevent.
5.) We have financing to begin drilling & we have equipment on order to further enhance our existing ball mill operation.
6.) We will drill this summer. Period.

Thats pretty much what the pitch at the NY meeting is going to be, IMHO.

SFMI needs to drill and so forth, but they have real assets and they have built & are running a genuine ball mill operation. And whether folks like it or not, the piles are well worth processing for their unexploited residual mineralization.

BTW DCBass.... I'd like to ask you if you can get something out there you may have at your fingertips:

In an old post, I did a lengthy comparison of the comparative mineralization.

DCBass (or someone else who has it flagged).... can you provide a link for everyone else out there? If not, I'll try to dig it out this weekend & post it. That post lists the facts that the raw data on SFMI's piles is not as bad as is portrayed around here. By comparison, it actually outpaces, by a considerable margin, the mines in other places that other companies repeatedly point to and call "stellar". Companies all over trumpet their purported "bonanza" finds, but when compared to SFMI's piles, the piles SFMI holds are consistently better in quality. And they are far more economical, too, because every other company has to expend the energy, time, & money to bring the piles they will process out of the earth.

SFMI has the fabulous rare advantage of having their piles, however concentrated they are, sitting above ground already.

Simple as that.

Period.

Its obvious that there is considerable value in the mountain and in the Sinker. And its relevent in spades that Hurricne Rick has repeatedly pointed to the secretly ongoing accumulation. These two alone make it rational to consider SFMI as a worthy buy at these levels, IMHO.

But regarding the simultaneous release of a PR, the crew making PR decisions for SFMI has no past record of ever doing what is needed in terms of building up this company in the public info-space.

If they don't act simultaneously, then IMHO they will be acting very insipidly, regardless of whether new info is an actual part of the NY meeting. Whether they play games with it like they always seem to do.... thats another matter. I hope they don't and doubt they will be that stupid, but nothing in the area of stupid PR behaviour would surprise me coming from this company.

Lets hope they do the smart thing and act simultaneously.

Imperial Whazoo

Thats ridiculous. I just got a screener flag that pointed me to NHPC and I'm trying to come up to speed as fast as possible.

Some of us actually day trade and do DD for a living, and have done so for years by the way, so, at the risk of being blunt, your saying I'm looking too deep is fatuous.

In fact, going to the NPHC community to try to make it unnecessary for one solitary guy to do all the digging and deducing is a obviously right-minded, bubba. Thats the real usefullness of this, or any, blog, BTW. And its just common sense for me to ask those on a board to answer a few targeted inquiries.

That said, if you think that reading the filing and thinking it through and asking a few targeted questions is "getting too deep", then my experienced and rather jaundiced eye on the thing tells me you will crash and burn becuase you will get blind sided by something you could have seen coming if you had simple stopped such silliness as reprimanding other people for trying to grasp the intricacies.

Simply put: with NHPC, and with any investment that gets a financing deal such as this done & publishes the details, interested players like me are duty bound, in that its my money, to dig into it and "get too deep". Frankly, if you DON'T grab hold of the details and gather them in and massage them and work the possible outcomes out before hand then you will be destroyed more times than not.

IMHO, I am spot on to ask what I can about NHPC because, as I see it, only a boneheaded fool would do all the leg work alone and not seek to come up to speed ASAP by asking questions.

Imperial Whazoo

I did a quick read of the agreement and not a detailed analysis. I'm no attorney and legalese like that kind of makes my eyes glaze over, but it looks to me like it provides a price 125% above an recent average price (5 days???) and IMHO, this insulates the immediate resale of the sahres. A lot of these schemes raise money by selling the shares at a severe discount, which (of course) results in an al but immediate dump by the recipient company, which drives down the price.

But, correct me if my quick read is wrong, but it looks to me like, the 125% above price will not be a situation like that.... where the raising of money equates to immediate crashing of share price.

And, again, maybe a more legal mind can correct me if I got it wrong )I'd appreciate being on surer footing by having legal beagles weigh in, actually, and I bet may non-attorney types would appreciate insights too).

Thats my "quick-n-dirty read (or perhaps misread)

What say other folks?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

OK so.... if there is this month involved, what dates are you expecting?

What date are you attributing as "from addressing" and what date are you thus speculating will be KING's "obtaining current status" date?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

OK. So, I scrutinized the purported p&D site myself and concluded it was not an actual P&D, which leads me to tend to line up with your conclusion that its not an actual P&D.

But what backup info do you know about that lets us decide that you are also correct in setting out a timeline of 8 or 9 days to a filing? Anything you can put out ther for the rest of us to hang our hats on? Why 8 or 9 days, for example?

Saying that, what can we expect from the filing?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

Here's the link to the news.

http://philly.citybizlist.com/2/2011/7/21/SilverSun-Technologies-Eliminates-Additional-1.3-Million-of-Debt.aspx

Imperial Whazoo

The levels of solid waste covered by the existing permit are not sung up against the output levels of the prior 2000 daily allowance.

As such, the question is not whether a modified Solid Waste is yet out there.

Fact is.... if the levels covered by the existing one have sufficient slack in their levels, then it is irrelevent that no solid waste modified is yet out there because there will only be a need if the allowed levels under the existing one are too tight.

Given the miniscule carbon black output from JBII's process and the fact that the carbon black could optionally be sold rather than disposed of, it is, IMHO, untruu to have it alledged that there is a need to see a modified fililng on the solid. Its not that snug in terms of volume permited and, even if it were, they could dispose of the output up to the allowed levels and sell the rest for a penny and still be in compliance.

JMHO

Imperial Whazoo

If there has been an official statement from either the company or the DEC that a new solid waste permit will be required, in tandem with the other ISSUED permits arising out of the latest barrage of tests (the stack tests), then I would like to see it.

Point 1: The solid waste permit is necessary and the one they have is valid as to the expiry date. It covers today, for example. Its valid into June

Point 2: the volume of solid waste is very small. With such a tiny solid waste output necessitating a permit, does anyone actually have a shred of evidence that the output threshhold for increasing the coverage of the permit is even going to be approached by the doubling of the capacity to 4000? I think not. I would welcome any evidence that shows that the threshold of the volume of covered output is even close to being approached by the doubling of the machine's output levels.

Point 3: The expiry date of the existing solid waste permit is in June. As such, even if they were to need a new permit, it is obvious that the current one is still in effect for whatever level it consists of....

....which brings me to my final point.

Point 4: According to presentations and filings, the solid waste in question is carbon black. JBII can either dispose of it under the solid waste permit or sell it to the carbon black market, at their discretion. As such, since they have a permit covering existing solid waste, it follows that, even if they were to face the necessity of getting a new permit for solid waste to handle the doubling of the capacity of the machines, it stands to reason that they could opt to sell any overage, even if selling at a loss were required. After all, if they can double output with the issuance of the air permit (TODAY!!!), it makes economic sense to go ahead and sell any overage of carbon black rather than be held up by the wait on any new solid waste permit, which, again, I doubt is going to be needed due to the tiny levels of carbon black involved.

JMHO

Imperial Whazoo

No sir! You are not correct.

This is the link, folks:
http://www.dec.ny.gov/cfmx/extapps/envapps/index.cfm?view=detail&applid=792467

Read it down to the bottom, nearly where you all will find the following:

This is a FINAL DISPOSITION EVENT

It is dated 03/16/2012

It has an effective date of 03/16/2012, which happens to be today

It is not going to expire until 06/30/2012

Any inspecificity in that is inapparent, to say the least, LOL.

Imperial Whazoo

PERMIT ISSUED!!!

Thanx 4 the postshowing it StockSpock!!!

I've been watching and wondering when the DEC would issue the permit to allow JBII to go to 4000 per day (twice the current level).

This post by StockSpock does everybody a great service!!

It is the link that shows that, as of today, the permit to double the operating capacity per day to the new 4000 level is ISSUED!!!!!

Here's the direct link to the issuance on the DEC site:

Now, I am delighted because I just bought in again yesterday when I saw the volumes stir a bit.

With the issuance of this long awaited permit, there should now be substance behind the volume we saw yesterday. I'd been wondering why there was tha volume event yesterday afternoon and now we all know why!

Everybody who is long can now commence being much happier.

Imperial Whazoo

Youu are correct, Z

That link was from long ago. The implication was that JBII has done that today but that is untrue. I saw the link and chased it down and had to chuckle at the misdirection involved in posting and old link to suggect to current readers and posters that something of that kind had just now happened this year. Nice bit of misdirection though LOL. Glad you pointed this out to the rest of us out here in fly-over country.

Imperial Whazoo

Who is you L2 provider?

tia

Imperial Whazoo

Yeah, my thought too.... Where is the link to the form D?

Link link.... who's got the link??

Imperial Whazoo

Drew a Fib fan on it a minute ago and it looks to have done an all but perfect 618 retrace. Now its starting back up.

382 is at .0016. If it gets past that, it may very well launch. Or it could do a touch of the 382 and pull back to the 786, doing a nice gartley butterfly before launching. 786 is .0008. I'd be very surprised to see a gartly out of it. I don't see it ever coming back down to the 786. thats my read.

Its proly a symetrical ABC. The A leg was a .002 sized move. So, if its a symetrical ABC up, then thats pointing to a target of .0031, approximately.

We'll see.

Now.... where is that news we are all waiting for?

Imperial Whazoo

Its a board where friendly and informed chat on subjects arising out of the stock in question: NEOM.

My failure to be able to buy NEOM thru TDA was a surprise to me and, far be it from me to be a small boar little pinhead who is too snotty to take the time to tell others about this bad situation, especially since it matters to me that I'm not able to get into NEOM using TDA and I assume that others might benefit from the info.

And anyway... according to you, to participate in the play that just happened today in NEOM, all I need do is snap my fingers and.... VOILA!!!! Instant change of brokers?

Yeah, right.

I'm sure there's an app for that, but in that I don't live under a rock, "just changing brokers", to use your phrasing, is not a real answer, is it?

:o)

Imperial Whazoo

I had a telecon with TDA rep about the situation. Here's the skinny.

they said that, on some brokers that are one man/small shops repping a handful of FINRA pinks, they often get crossways in heavy volume moves and do not fill correctly. So, apparently, TDA decides who gets to be available to be bought and who does not. And, I've been trading pinks for years as a day trader, and regardless of what the retail guys tell you, they all do it. They may front with explanations like you got from whoever you use, but I guarantee yoiu its the dang small shops not getting fills done to the big retail broker's liking.

I had one broker tell me that, due to the size of the computer clouds at the big retail brokers like ETrade & TDA, the retails have systems that execute by first taking a few milliseconds to nose around their in-house cloud before they go to the net to get their fills. The guy told me thay do this because they can make more chaching if they fill it in their own cloud. I don't like the pauses in retail platforms and so, I tend to like that explanation, even though the TDA gal I talked to swore up and down they never favor in-cloud fills. I frankly don't believe her, LOL.

And anyway, I much prefer the direct access platforms due to the fact that you can better control the fills yourself.

I'll tell you this: had I still been on the direct access platform, none of this would have happened. I'd have been in NEOM and not blogging about this stuff right now.


GLTY

Imperial Whazoo

Well, the actual problem is one of execution and, secondarily, of tradability. My attempt to buy NEOM today was jammed by TDA because they "protect" their clients from unscrupulous brokers representing certain stocks. I chatted with them before on this. And this stock, apparently, is represented by a broker that TDA thinks we need protecting from. Hence, they don't allow me to buy NEOM.

Each of the retail brokers you listed approach this issue exactly as does TDA. They proly differ in the stocks they allow, but they still have a set of stocks they will not let me buy.

Thats why I favor a direct access platform like I used with Watley (until Penson decided to stop clearing the pennies traded through Watley). I had to close the Watley acct and I chose TDA. Since then, I have several times run into this problem. Like today, I see a stock thats running and I try to buy. I get all the way through to order process online and it tells me, only after I've wasted the time, that I am not going to be allowed. I happen to know that all retail brokers have such a list. And again, the only difference is the stocks on their list.

With a direct access platform, I can send orders directly to Hudron or Auto or whoever is on the book. this effectively allows me to better control things. I pay a higher price, I know, but the freedom I get is worth it in instances such as this one where I was blocked fron participating in the move.

So, I called TrackData and they have a direct access platform. I could have bought NEOM had I had an account with them. It would have cost me more, but I'd at least have been able to get a seat at the table. I'm not immediately going to jump to TrackData without doing research.

So, that said, my question, arising out of this incident involving NEOM today is: other than the well known retail brokers, do any of the bloggers hereabouts use a direct access platform they'd like to point me to?

TIA

Go NEOM!! Wish I could play it with the rest of you.

Imperial Whazoo

Thats what I thought, so that confirms my expectation regarding the pattern of the 12/31 end date companies, such as this one.

Appreciate the polite reply.

Imperial Whazoo

I very seldom volunteer to let Google track me in any way, form fashion or manner. But thats just me.... a simple database technical guy who actually comprehends the scope of the templating that the major services conduct.

That said, its just plain wonderful to get insulted by an unnecessary, snide, attacking reply.

:o)

Imperial Whazoo

I just tried to buy at .0134 on TD Ameritrade and they refuse to open new positions in NEOM.

I hate this happening.

Anyone trade with a direct access platform out there? I used to trade with AB Watley until the Penson fiasco last summer. So.... now I'm stuck in TDA and they do not have a direct access platform, and hence, I try to buy through them and they will not fill, which is what I just experienced with NEOM.

Anyone out there in a direct access platform I could change to?

TIA & best of luck to all of you guys about to benefit from this upsurge in late day buying here.

Good luck all NEOMers, LOL.

Imperial Whazoo

10K due 3/31 ? Yes or no?

10Q due 3/15 ? Yes or no?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

Just trying to be sure I comprehend:

You said

Could you supply a link to that? TIA

Also... let me illustrate my confusion: Who, exactly, is "They" in your sentance refering to?

Again, TIA

Imperial Whazoo

Someone always knows something. All I want is to get the inside skinny in time to be in the mix on it. I wish it had been momo strong all the day long. Kind of tapered off at day's end, which caused me pause. We'll see though. A move to 20 would more than triple me. I could use it. I hit a homer on Monday with CBIS and its been dry as a boneyard the remainder of the week. Can't survive on fumes & rumors.

Imperial Whazoo

Got my attention too. But this must be a move on something other than vapors. Anyone got any idea what the deal is? A big news event was my guess but there was nothing after hours. Anyone know the scoop betty boop?

Imperial Whazoo

What is the anticipated filing date on their next expected meaningful financials?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

Yep. And as to trading it, the smartest folks were typified by being buyers on events like the high volume candle yesterdat at the bottom of the wave at 15:06 Eastern time. Let the mkt get you in and out.

Imperial Whazoo

Say folks -

Not a pinky but a swing trade in that I expect it to be multi-day. Just beginning to run today....

Symbol?

QPSA

Imperial Whazoo

Spot on. I think you are reading it right and are onto something as regards the value proposition. It looks to me like they (CB, that is) loan the money and generate return through royalty income & they have expense plus growth (assuming success in the aquired businesses) via the equity stake.

So, the formula for a loan, which would consist of interest & a pay back schedule, is replaced with perpetual income stream off of the royalty part of the formula (surely greater net/net than any interest) plus a vested interest in the success of the companies aquired via the equity positions given as part of the financing. Not a bad deal if you can stumble on it, LOL.

Imperial Whazoo

Hey BJ....

Way to go, man. Excellent news.

And as for passing it by the board... NOT!!!

Imperial Whazoo

Yeah, you gotta be impressed at 90% rate. Wowza.

Imperial Whazoo

Yep, it is indeed quite clear. Every wordis crystal clear.

They have been permitted to run at the higher rate. They have to wait on the solid waste permit before they can do so because there are two permits. One to run. One to dispose the solid waste.

Also, they have contracts for 500K litres output. They also have other contracts. When they get the permit to dispose of the waste in the landfill, they can open up the throttle and roar at whatever level they need to satisfy their contracts.

If they have partial usage levels, then I will expect them to fill the remainder of their time with business that grows to fill up their allotment of usable hours until the machines max out.

They will also build and get permits on a third machine.

Then another, and another....

....and a couple more....

And so on and so on and so on.

There is not a single word in the thing that is being complained about, as though it is unclear, that is actually unclear.

Every bit of it is delightfully, beautifully clear as a bell. Crystal clear in all ways. End of story.

I think it is tremendous that it is obvious and clear and plain to see. What a fabulous set of plain and crystal clear paragraphs and sentances we have here. Very, very clear and impressive, indeed.

:o)

Imperial Whazoo

What he said was the order was 500K, of which 85K had thusfar been sent. What thus matters, IMHO, is the 500K, even though the 85K number is excellent in and of its self.

Imperial Whazoo

I went and read it all to be sure. Basically here is what I concluded.

They realized that what they state they said in the EX.99.1 attachment could have possibly been construed as not having been uniformly released to the rest of us, and thus they could have possibly been called upon to answer an allegation regarding some minor infraction by the SEC.

Now, on reading it thoroughly, it defies me what they felt they may have been afraid of because its all pretty much identical to what they released to the rest of us.

I figure that their high priced legal beagles flagged it a a way-out-there exposure issue and, rather than ignore it on the 99.9% chance that it would generate NOT a problem, they chose to be overly cautious and to file on that particular issue, thereby dealing with it.

Or, to be cynical, maybe there was a need by their legal beagle lawyer guy to pay for a root canal and he needed to bill a little bit more, so he filed that, explaining it as a smart thing to do, and sent Quepasa an additional billable. LOL

You choose logical or cynical. Either way, net/net, its not any kind of legit issue IMHO.

Imperial Whazoo

Hi dmbao -

What dates are you referring to as the ones you point to in your comment about FOGC? The chart shows a move in September 2011. Is that the on of which you speak?

TIA

Imperial Whazoo

Refresh my memory... when is it to happen?

Imperial Whazoo

I think it was at 3:49, about 10 min prior to EOD.

I had already given up and was tracking a couple of others to see if their close satisfied my expectations, so I missed the news here. But there was a volume of 1698623 in the last 10 minutes of the day, so somebody knee-jerked a bunch of buying. Wish I'd been watching and I'd have stepped in too. As to whether it plays out Monday.....

We'll just have to watch the volume Monday morning.

Imperial Whazoo

Edited: fade - saw your post. Comment at bottom. I'm out of here. Dinner time.

:o)

Edit ends

Original post below
Relevant numbers from the PDF just published:

Gold (grams/Ton) 6.32
Silver (grams/Ton) 7.70

Obviously, those are absolutely worthless results.

It is perfectly clear that there is nothing good about the numbers just published. I mean, look at them hi-lited in color and so forth:

Gold (grams/Ton) 6.32
Silver (grams/Ton) 7.70

Kind of obvious how bad this thing is, isn't it?

IMHO. it is just terrible to have all those worthless piles of completely depleted rock and such miserable results to have been the outcome of all this work that has been going on.....

I mean.... what a terrible piece of news!!!

Look at it again.

Gold (grams/Ton) 6.32
Silver (grams/Ton) 7.70

Horrible.

Just horrible.

One thing I have to say regarding the numbers they fabricated to publish in this PDF: management is stellar in the degree to which they do not hesitate to go whole hog, pedal to the metal, in continuing to pretend to all the world that there is real mineralization up there in Southwest Idaho.

I mean, pretty clearly, they decided that, given the need to continue to fake things, why not make the fake outrageously huge?

And there is no doubt about it: the dimensions of these numbers are outrageously good and enormously huge. Just look at them once again!!

Gold (grams/Ton) 6.32
Silver (grams/Ton) 7.70

And I think the question actually begs to be asked: is the lie big enough? Did they under-do it this time by generating such modest numbers as these?

Gold (grams/Ton) 6.32
Silver (grams/Ton) 7.70

Oryx.....

:o)

Cookin' brotha!!!

Imperial Whazoo

EDITED:

fade - I saw your post and I'll be gathering myself prior to tomorrow. I do not care whether the numbers just published are liked or believed. All I want to see is volume. If there is volume indicating interest, I'll be interested. If not, I won't.

So....

Was trading another and missed it. Darn!

Imperial Whazoo

If PQ is deliberately misleading us by calling, as you put it,

, then he is doing something that is totally fake, whether or not you choose to employ that word or not. You are trying to make a difference without a difference, IMHO.

I'm clearly telling you that I do not subscribe to this idea that he is doing this. I think the consultants are real. They are doing real work. And an heir is not a consultant, obviously. Nor is a guy with adjacent land.

Whether the word "fake" is employed or not, were SFMI to be doing it, SFMI would be being fake in what was being deliberately done, wouldn't it? SFMI is using real consultants and there are heirs and adjacent property owners, but SFMI is not calling these entities consultants.

That said, you and I do agree about the people who have property positions traceable to old claims and old property ownerships and so forth.

Notice that I say "TRACEABLE" and remember that it is my opinion that the consultants are real, doing real work.

Gee.... I wonder what kind of consultant might be engaged in doing REAL work like this???? Hmmmm......

And here's a hint about whether it is possible to make a good living as a property consultant: guess which blogger on this blog board personally made a living down here in Texas frequenting the dusty archives of such places as county courthouses, in search of property descriptions and so forth?

Hmmmmm.... I wonder who could have spent 9 years personally writing programs to facilitate the employees of a consulting firm that was doing this kind of consulting work, and who could thus say, with certainty, that such work pays well.... up to and exceeding 7 figures a year??

Hmmmm..... I wonder who that could be? You know.... a REAL consultant engaged in REAL work?

:o)

So, I could not disagree with you more regarding insisting that there is a thing going on like the one you describe becuase I do not think PQ is calling heirs and owners of adjacent properties "consultants". IMHO, thats utterly ridiculous.

I think there are real consultants doing real work and that is all there is to it. If it includes rounding up ownerships and so forth, so be it. And if that accounts for what RK let out in the recent TV program, maybe it is more intelligent for folks to grasp the actual situatiuon rather than demanding, over and over again, that we bow down to the golden calf of anger over the demand that fraud is the explanation; that fraud is the only explanation for the vagueness. I think this is simpleton's fare. Thats what I think. I think the real story is a stealth project that devestates the price because it is so hugely open ended. But if a buyer has fewer legal issues due to the control of the mountain such a project causes, is genuine long term help or hurt actually being done?

I choose to not succomb to anger. Be angry and make money off of the chart. Who cares what else is going on? I repeatedly buy in and sell out. Like I told the blog, I just did this one more time by having read the chart correctly and traded in at .046, selling at a splay of prices well above that.

Getting angry is insensate, IMHO. Its genuine anger, mind you, but its a choice to see it as a real construction site with a real ball mill and real dore bars and real people traipsing about and getting paid. If its an elaborate movie set that is designed to trick us, then its a long-winded and overly complex bit of fraud, isn't it? Kind of elaborate and expensive to run a scam this way, if you ask me.

Anger is not constructive and thats all there is to it.

I too am angry at them, but I'm above that, on purpose. Its a choice and I highly recommend it over conspiracy theories like the one that proposes that the consultants are really "heirs". IMHO, that is utterly preoposterous.

Imperial Whazoo