GLAMIS GOLD - GLG 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 : GLAMIS GOLD - GLG

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Cage Rattler who wrote (449)	10/15/2006 3:20:46 PM
From: John Sladek	Read Replies (1) of 459

Cage, I don't think that the Yahoo posters are is correct on many different levels: all seemed to blame the drop in both GG and GLG on the merger rather than the changes within the gold market itself The comparative chart tells a different story: bigcharts.marketwatch.com If McEwen can convince a judge to force a vote of G shareholders then this deal might be toast. Of course, if the G shareholder think that GLG is good value now that Penasquito resources have been upgraded, maybe they will support the deal. Well G shareholders may not like the deal, but to claim that there is a fraud involved is unfounded. In summary GG holders resent not having a vote and argue fraud Personally, I think that GLG shareholders are lucky to be taken out by a company as good as G. I think that G's prospects are excellent even without GLG. while GLG holders think of GG as an anchor holding them back.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next