InvestorsHub Logo

Aqua-FX

01/17/16 1:54 PM

#3451 RE: NomeSeaGold #3450

Im going to have to agree with you Nome. Based on all of our other endeavors it sounds too good to be true and something is always missed in the details.

Lets sign these mexican majors and get the easy stuff

8thaero

01/17/16 2:52 PM

#3454 RE: NomeSeaGold #3450

Sounds like a good platform running position; avoid extremes in the middle. Once again I've no info on the plans other than I don't know many'd risk a large $ mil and few years building and ship conversion in the works on a project with no possible value in sight. So I assume there's a working site in view under a legal basis. Then only a nut would keep digging where there is no more pay out when can swing the stern before a need to reposition. Closest concept I come with is watching the clam dredge at the cruise ship port in New Orleans where they keep going back over and over just like the ship channel all way to gulf past the delta created by endless current flow. This is stuff washed there by about same by the rivers right? Not created in molten flow in place?

Lastly this is not a Mexus project at all as the 11% royalty interest is in the cable extraction as a 2nd N Pacific interest. Obviously if the one ship is 100% involved with mining gold during open waters Nome or elsewhere it will take 2nd large ocean goer to do that and I do know any plan will involve the state and natives as environmental remediation. Seems all there is a simple outline to be filed in but I can't see it as a pure waste of effort. 8