Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Pangea Goldfields T.PGD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert who wrote (506)	11/17/1999 4:30:00 PM
From: salva	Respond to of 1178

<<<<<<. If you have bought Pangea shares, you are betting on a significant find and not pure speculation that they will be taken out. It could happen, but unlikely >>>>>>>>>>> You are SO WRONG-spend some time to analyize the results of the Tulawaka drilling findings published to date! WE have a 'another Bulyanhulu' (Sutton) in the making!!!

To: Robert who wrote (506)	11/17/1999 8:17:00 PM
From: Terry Swift	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1178

Robert: I've stated a similar opinion in the past but you and I are the only ones here that think Pangea's VJ'd properties make it less attractive for a major to take them over. Their shareholder rights plan calls for each stockholder to be allowed to buy one additional share for each share they own at 50% of market price at the time anyone acquires at least 20% of the stock of Pangea without agreement of Pangea's Board. It makes it more expensive to take them over but certainly not too difficult for any of the majors. What is more problematical for a company like Barrick is Pangea's large number of properties which they will not control if the JV partner performs as agreed. Major producers don't want to own properties they don't control. Of course, if they can get such properties free; i.e., pay only the value of the properties they would control, such diversity of ownership doesn't present a problem. I also agree that I don't think Pangea is looking to be taken over. All indications I've got from them is that they want their properties developed and want to collect their share of revenue from those properties while the major does all the heavy lifting and bears the financial burdens. Of course, no company announces they are for sale, unless they are broke and need a white knight. The takeover scenario will play out depending on drill results, as it always does, as will the true value of the company. I don't want to see a takeover until we know what the company is worth and that is a ways away yet. Lots of drilling to be done on PGD's properties before we will know what's on them. Terry

To: Robert who wrote (506)	11/17/1999 11:15:00 PM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1178

We seem to be at cross purposes - of course an annual report is what it is - an annual report - and obviously the stated intention of management is to build a gold mining production company - but no management is going to put in the annual report - "this is an attractive take over prospect"!! And in spite of what you say - it is exactly that - and it's much simpler that you appear to think - a company makes an offer for the issued shares, and if it's high enough the company will be bought. From what I hear the shares of the company are widely held - so a takeover at the right price will succeed. d