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 : ARP - V Argentina Gold
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Enigma who wrote (657)10/27/1998 12:21:00 AM
From: Elizabeth Andrews  Read Replies (1) of 3282
 
There's lots of other things that Barrick can do. For example, it is in better position, than Newmont, to get control of the property as it can propose financing for development to earn a greater interest. Let's not forget that Barrick didn't buy 40% of ARP. Its interest in the property may not dilutable unless they don't contribute beyond the $7.3 million. We don't know the details of what happens if the JV partners don't contirbute pro-rata. Plus you can bet Barrick has an RFR on any and all of ARP's interest. The original deal in Sept 1994 called for the expenditure of US$7.3 million over 5 years. At that date the JV has to present a feasibility study to IPEEM. Expenditures were to be 60% ARP and 40% Barrick. The property is subject to a 1% NSR and a 5% Net Benefits Royalty, whatever that is. Newmont's strategy may be flawed.
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