"Read the news closely - It is intersting"
I agree it is "intersting", with emphasis on the "sting" part. So I went back to the news, for a closer reading:
"Anaconda Uranium Acquires PGM Exploration Project In The River Valley Area Near Sudbury." Tuesday February 29, 10:25 am Eastern Time. Company Press Release
biz.yahoo.com
Wherein ANU appears to have become a pgm player by acquiring three claim blocks in the River Valley Intrusion.
"Anaconda Uranium Corporation: Company Announcement."
Friday March 24, 9:25 am Eastern Time. Company Press Release
biz.yahoo.com
Wherein in it stated in its entirety:
"TORONTO, ONTARIO--Anaconda Uranium Corporation (CDNX: ANU) today announced there have been no new corporate developments which would account for the activity in the trading of the company's stock yesterday."
"Anaconda Uranium Announces Agreement With Aquiline Resources For The River Valley Exploration Project."
Tuesday March 28, 9:44 am Eastern Time. Company Press Release.
biz.yahoo.com
Wherein is stated that ANU had "reached agreement" for another company to take over these three claim blocks, for cash and shares of which "$10,000 of this has already been paid" to ANU. Also that other "non-resource opportunities" might arise such as "utilising the Company as a technology related vehicle."
From these factual excerpts above, and without further information at hand, sit seems to me that there are a number of interpretations of this situation. Not all of them are kind. But the facts appear to indicate that ANU appeared to position itself as a player in the River Valley pgm area play. Then announced that there have been no new corporate developments which would account for the activity in the trading of the company's stock on 23rd March. And then less than a month after announcing claims in the River Valley, announce agreement to divest the claims, indicate changing direction for at least part if not all of the company's business, and imply that the company shell may be used for a completely different business.
I guess that it all depends on what "have been no new corporate developments which would account.." means.
As an investor my opinion is that vending the claims, the acquisition of which was important enough for the first PR, represents material changes in the company's status, direction and business.
Are we to believe that this all happened between Friday morning and Tuesday morning, or that it was not a new corporate development?
What does the CDNX think?
Ptaskmaster |
