RECLAMATION MANAGEMENT (RMLL.O) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : RECLAMATION MANAGEMENT (RMLL.O)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: JAS who wrote (221)	8/5/1999 9:53:00 AM
From: Wizzer	Read Replies (2) of 238

"have led us to believe that there is no substance to the bid " The funny thing about semantics is that this statement worries me as apparently it does you and others. I believe they could have denied it with more vigor, and instead we have an exercise in interpretation and meaning. I felt the retraction was inadequate as is, and requires a more in depth explanation. What does "led us to believe" mean, either it is or it is not. Do they not know their own business? Do they not know if there was an offer? Joan Purdy's statement is, in my opinion, purposely ambiguous. Funny thing though for Joan is that I asked her very specific questions, so she better not have been lying. I like the "premature leak" during negotiations idea, but who knows. I suspect that there is something more, bad or good. I hope it is the latter. Regards, Wisam

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next