SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Crystallex (KRY)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: charred who wrote (4728)2/6/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: Mike Campagna  Read Replies (2) of 10836
 
Charred: (More like burnt to a crisp after today). Something to ponder from one of the more enlightened at SH............

Thanks to AndreN, I have a copy of the WSJ article in front of me...
According to AndreN, there is an interesting story to this article: As
R.M. told him, Placer called the
WSJ and said something like "Mael gave up its rights to LC4&6 and we
have an agreement that
shows it...print that story. " The reporter aparently would not print
the story without seeing the
agreement which PDG refused to give him. The reporter called R.M who
showed him the agreement
and the rest is what follows....

Mostly recaps what we already know but here are a couple of quotes..

"If the Sc accepts the case, Crystallex could demand a substantial
one-time payment to go away,
though company officials say they would rather help develop the property
with Placer and the CVG..."

"Blunders by the CVG and Venezuela's MEM , as well as badlt written
contracts and laws, have
created a legal opening that KRY is exploiting..."

"Placer claims that the concession has expired. Whats more, Placer
lawyers say that Mael signed
over the rights to the concession so that it could be given to the CVG
and Placer Dome in 1992. In
return, Mael recieved other mining concessions.."
"Crystallex believes that Mael never gave up its concession rights in
the 1991 agreement says R.M.
.......A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT VIEWED BY THIS NEWSPAPER DOESN"T
EXPLICITLY
STATE THAT MAEL GAVE UP ITS CLAIM."

Food for thought
AV

What say you now?

Mike
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News