Silk Energy Ltd SLKEF

RE: wailer

[millright]

wailer, You say one day I'm a lawyer, the next I'm a geologist, a psychiatrist, a financial advisor. Beerbelly also added teacher. I don't know where you get these interpretations - but I can tell you that I have access to some people who are qualified in the law, geology, corporate finance, etc. Some of them get quite a kick out of some of the wisdom that's spouted on StockHouse. One source who seems to have a knowledge of technical analysis, has proven to be quite an information source for this forum - he's provided excellent unbiased technical insight, that many have agreed is a welcome replacement for your inane efforts. I do have access to a source that is quite competent in the geology and mining issues pertinent to both ISM and LBE. He has given me some information on the issues involved, and I have passed on some of his comments on this forum. But it sure doesn't take in depth training as a geologist to put the Darcell report in perspective. Plain common sense is all it takes to realize the Darcell valuation is without even basic foundation - a geologist knows this of course, and has trouble not pissing himself in laughter - that someone defends the gibberish as meaningful. Darcell himself is likely amazed that there are morons that defend his numbers, in spite of his disclaimers and obvious lack of training on the subject. I will give ISM leadership more credit than you. I don't rate some of their abilities that highly, but I wouldn't belittle them to the point of suggesting they would go to Darcell for a resource valuation. That's something like going to a shoe shine for a second opinion on a lobotomy - at least go to a barber that works somewhere near the target. ISM hired miningstockreports strictly for PR purposes, this kind of penny stock promotion outfit has access to writers like Darcell, who for a fee will scribble out the type of report that he produced. Darcell wouldn't even pretend that his qualifications equip him to provide a resource valuation that meets securities standards. ISM surely didn't get Darcell for the purpose of getting that quality of resource analysis for their own information - but it served their purposes in a promotional brochure. If they wanted meaningful information on the resource, their own geologist could have given them a superior opinion in two minutes - for free. The cheerleaders here are coming up with all kind of reasons that a NI43-101 has not been released. One said that they didn't want to tip their hand and risk a premature take-over. Now the story is that its too costly. My guess is that ISM management prefer the wild speculation on what they might be sitting on, to the valuation that would come out of a full NI43-101. Of course I could be wrong - all it will take to prove me wrong is release of a full NI43-101 report, showing a present value on the resource of $1.055 billion. Any bets?