Graham Kelly wrote:
As far as INTGold are concerned, I'm very confident that INTGold is backed by gold.
I invite everyone on this list to visit http://talk.e-gold.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?visit=e-gold-list&id=221190894 and search the archive for OSGold. In there you will find numerous messages to this list from Graham Kelly extolling the virtues of OSGold. OSGold, which Graham sold in large quantities for many months, went under. The first signs of serious trouble were in late May 2002. A lot of people lost a lot of money. Many of those people, possibly several thousand, relied upon Graham's input to make their decision to use OSGold. Even very late in the day, long after OSGold started to falter, Graham posted messages seeming to extol his confidence in OSGold and its proprietors.
So, those of you who have read Graham's message and think you should rely upon his information to make a choice to use IntGold should perhaps revisit this notion. Past experience of people relying upon Graham hasn't always worked out well.
INTGold management have faxed me proof of gold bullion purchases.
Graham, I invite you to post these documents to a web site. Or, were you told they are top secret confidential?
I think it is important to understand that faxes are not original documents, that purchases of gold bullion are not proof of present ownership, and that anything one person can buy he can also sell. I realize that it is not difficult in this era for someone to fake together a bunch of receipts and claim that he owns a bunch of things. A receipt for the Brooklyn Bridge is not proof of ownership. I wonder whether Graham has validated or verified these documents by contacting the purported seller(s) of the gold.
At the same time, I think anyone who is comparing e-gold to IntGold should realize that e-gold doesn't offer a bunch of faxes of gold purchases. E-gold's examiner page and the pages you can reach from there by clicking on the magnifying glass icons show the location of gold bullion stored in allocated storage by bullion banks in London, Zurich, and Dubai, along with serial numbers and bar weights. There are also available on the e-gold site contracts and other information about not only the gold in the system but the e-metal in the system. (Lamentably, there are not current audits for e-gold. Maybe those will show up one day.)
By way of contrast, there is no information about where INTGold has stored their gold, in whose name it is stored, in what kind of vault it is stored. The purchase data faxed to Graham about which he is so happy has not been made available to the public - the other users of INTGold. We also don't know about how much gold there is in storage compared to how much IntGold there is in circulation.
Most important of all, IntGold has no process for redemption identified on their web site, based on my various visits. In contrast, e-gold's user agreement spells out how to redeem your e-gold for actual physical gold. I've done this several times with e-gold since opening my account, so I know that e-gold is redeemable for gold. I have no such confidence in the IntGold system.
As well, we deal with 1000's of happy INTGold customers, and we rarely (if ever) receive any INTGold complaints.
Unfortunately, the same was true of OSGold. In fact, there are messages in the Lyris archive from 2001 and the first few months of 2002 in which Graham points out that he has thousands of happy OSGold customers. However, after June 2002, there were tens of thousands of unhappy OSGold customers.
OSGold, by the way, stood for "Off Shore Gold" though the company was based out of North Carolina, as I recall. I wonder if INTGold stands for "In North Texas" Gold or some such. They have an address in Greenville, Texas, I think.
On the other hand, "Int" might be a clever contraction of "isn't." As in "Isn't Gold" or "Ain't Gold."
Having said that, GoldNow cannot verify the management style of INTGold, or their moral/ethical basis, but I'm sure that they are at least gold backed.
I question the ethics of INTGold at least insofar as the same people appear to be running a number of Ponzi-style investment schemes. (The parallel to OSGold and its related entity, OSOpps, a Ponzi scheme, is clear.)
I don't understand how Graham can claim that a bunch of faxed purchase documents in any way demonstrates that the gold which was purchased is still owned by IntGold, or is stored by IntGold or is in any way comparable to the amount of the IntGold in circulation. So, why is Graham "sure" that IntGold is gold backed?
Moreover these representations by Graham remind me a great deal of his enthusiastic statements about OSGold. Is IntGold another OSGold waiting to happen? Are more thousands of online currency users going to get burned? I don't know.
I do think the parallels are worth considering.
Regards,
Jim http://www.ezez.com/
--- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
