ORXX - Orex Gold Mines Corporation 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 : ORXX - Orex Gold Mines Corporation

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ga Bard who wrote (238)	8/6/1999 11:08:00 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) of 2392

I still don't have a clue what you're talking about. First of all, are you saying Makhmoudov's stock agreement wasn't ORXX restricted for common, but rather Company X (HABE?) for ORXX? I assume that's what the 1,000,000 shares of ABC @ .10 for 100,000 of DEF @ 1.00 example was all about. So, now, explain to me the incentive for the parties to do this other than to, I suppose, make sure not to affect the market price of each stock. Does each party now own the other stock? I see no reason why they'd do such a deal otherwise. If they now own each other's stock, wouldn't that mean each person had more confidence in the other's company? Wouldn't they now have a legal right to do with that stock as they please? This part about an "anti-dilution" agreement makes no sense. Either the stock was restricted or it wasn't. If it was restricted and the legends removed then we are back to the scenario in my previous post on this subject. If it was free-trading, then I can't see as how ORXX would have any right to cancel it. It's up to you whether you want to clarify this point or continue to belittle me for asking. I hope you choose the mature route. - Jeff

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next