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 : St. Jude Resources......V.SJD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (2880)	4/18/2000 1:17:00 AM
From: bill718	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3065

Board and management changes are probably a good idea. I don't think the original financing was ever meant to be used for investment purposes only so that the company could simply exist while trying virtually nothing to advance the value for shareholders. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Other BEEFS of mine... i) the stupid chair/patio lounger absurd idea we all loved suggests mgmt changes are in order and.... ii) there's not even have a basic website up yet to keep shareholders informed!!!! This is a mystery to me which I don't understand. If mgmt does not realize the significance of a website in this day and age, then this is another indication that changes are in order: stjuderesources.com

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (2880)	4/18/2000 9:17:00 AM
From: russwinter	Respond to of 3065

The key to unlocking this company is to get the support of remaining institutions trapped in the stock. Does anyone know who they are? I guess the usual suspects (Quebec pension, etc.). One would think that they want the greater liquidity offered by a larger combined entity. Should they give the directive, the change will be made. I favor the merger not the new BOD approach. I still believe it no longer makes sense for many of these surviving juniors like SJD to carry on. They should be combined and consolidated with stronger firms. Overall costs can be cut (like the salary and office), there is better access to capital, combined expertise, project diversification, and better stock liquidity. Finally there is likely to be better management. I definitely feel that would be the case with a consolidation with Crew. A few like AH have argued against that point, but given the track record, I have no idea why. Finally, I spoke with Crew yesterday, and they indicated that they are at last scheduled to meet with Terrell this week to discuss various mutual issues. Maybe at least a few positive directions can be hashed out?