SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) 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 : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: cruncher who wrote (1255)	5/25/1998 2:08:00 PM
From: INFOMAN	Read Replies (2) of 7235

No one has asked me to post anything. I have said on a previous posting that I am very close to the events which are presently unfolding. My information is accurate, the outcome of last Thursdays court appearance by SUF is proof of this. IMHO, SUF has no cash reserves to settle the heirs. Financial institutions will not back SUF unless they have the mineral rights registered in their name. If this was a matter of principle for SUF, then they would of proceeded with the court action. They did not, as they had no case. Just as I had stated in all my previous postings. Lets think in a logical manner. If SUF had settled with NGS, then they would of already recouped their outlay. They have no money, despite their assurances that they have banks willing to finance them

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next