Cage, As a G shareholder myself, I think that the G shareholders have a point.
What do you think about the GG stockholders bitching about being screwed?
G's shareholders rejected a merger with GLG in early 2005, and rightly so, in my opinion. Later, G's management went out and negotiated a friendly deal with GLG, and structured the deal such that G's shareholder's don't get a vote. I think that management did it this way because they knew that the shareholders would not be in favor of it. To me, it seems like a slap in the face. At least now everybody knows that G is being run by they type of people that don't care about what their shareholders think.
I can see lots of reasons why G shareholders wouldn't want to hook up with GLG. First, because they rejected them before. Second, because the only property that GLG has that has the potential to be world-class is Penasquito. Finally, I think that these numbers say it all:
Au Produced, 1st six months 2006:
Goldcorp: 637,600
Glamis: 286,418
( From the latest quarterly reports: goldcorp.com and
glamis.com )
I own GLG shares as well, and fortunately for me, my GLG shares went up more than my G shares went down....
I think that G shareholders should have another look at GLG before they reject it out of hand. If things go according to plan, next year's production should be up significantly for GLG. My conclusion: GLG isn't much of a company, but it doesn't suck nearly as bad as it did before it acquired WTC. |
