>>> besides PDG has no real case...
This is an assumption I would not make at this point! If PDG developed the project under a sanctioned agreement with a company that had the blessing of a Government Agency (E&M) than they may have a case. It goes back to the point made earlier, did PDG progress this property with:
"knowledge that they did not own the property"
I think logically, that PDG conformed to the rules/regs of the day and at one time or another had been assured by a government department that it had legal right to explore the property. That exploration would obviously have been accompanied with the promise of a title to the property in the future. PDG is not a "junior" it has dealt with many different bureauracracies(sp).
Ultimately the money it spent on 4&6 was spent in good faith(IMHO). It was not spent to exert a level of ownership that it did not assume it already had from the Ven authorities(that is throwing good money after bad). The dispute arose sometime after PDG had been "on the property", I don't think that is a point of dispute, even on this thread.
Scenario #1
So IMHO what we have is a company (PDG) who honestly thought they owned the property, progressed 4&6 as a result of that knowledge. Ran into a property dispute with KRY. Didn't believe the claim in the original submission and stuck by their guns in hopes of clearing up the dispute and retaining the property. But, in the end, "did not win",or
Scenario #2
What we have is a company (PDG) who honestly thought they owned the property, progressed 4&6 as a result of that knowledge. Ran into a property dispute with KRY. Didn't believe the claim in the original submission and stuck by their guns in hopes of clearing up the dispute and retaining the property. But, in the end, won
Both scenario's are just as viable as others proposed on this thread!! The only difference is they donot include the "evil empire" manipulation of a small company called KRY" that is prevalent on the thread.
If in fact this thread is correct, then after the dispute is over and KRY receives full title to 4&6, KRY would have ample opportunity to sue PDG for knowingly manipulating its stock and it's property,its reputation and its company. They could seek restitution for natural progression of "its" project, and the loss of market capitalization and inability to raise finances during the dispute. The suit could be launched in Canada, so "international rules", or Ven's supreme law would not have to be challenged.
I await this suit, If it proves successful then I will believe the "evil empire" attitude that is prevalent, until then I will believe it is a "dispute of significance" with an outcome "to be announced".
the Chief |
