Copper Fox 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 : Copper Fox

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

Hog Head

To: explorationguy who wrote (9005)	1/3/2015 12:40:38 PM
From: Metacomet	1 Recommendation of 10654

..which brings me back to my primary complaint The BFS, in the body of the document, asserted that the Salazar parameters had been met There was no reservation to that claim We had earned it, and Teck as well as Tetra-Tech in addition to CUU were required to buy off on that language The business case notwithstanding, our contract required the delivery of the balance of Tecks indirect interest in the project as a result of that 90 million dollar deliverable Until somebody can give me a reason why we did not deliver it and start the back in clock, I will not get off of this one-note Failing to generate any interest in the industry at large, Teck could have driven the exact screwing we received at any time So why didn't we at least claim what we had earned and see if we could stir up any interest ..and the obvious answer is Teck did not want to take a chance on totally relinquishing their interest and having to compete to reacquire their position ..and we certainly failed to extract any negotiating leverage for that fact ..and I will continue to suspect collusion in light of that failure and the irregularities in the execution of the exploration program vis-a-vis Salazar

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next