To: goldsheet who wrote (80868 ) 1/18/2002 2:00:58 PM From: IngotWeTrust Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 116832 >>Give it a year<< I hear your points, but do NOT necessarily agree. 1) There was SOME reason, yet to be revealed why NEM paid top dollar for top Normandy. 2) ABX can be an irritating pustule, no doubt, but business is business, and he who has the gold, makes the rules. I do not believe for one second Murdy doesn't have a strategy hammered out with ABX for the superpit JV. This is NOT the first time a couple of big names have had to share via a JV in some mining project 3) How's this for poser? 3.A) NEM knows micro-recovery better than Anglo 3.B) You posted this AM the link to goldrush moving to India due to similarity in geo w/Australia's content, and the supposed fact that all the gold that was going to be found in Australia had been found, and it was basically time to move on to other golden pastures. 3.C) NEM unparalleled success down here in NEV may have some cross-referencing to Australia's geo that we just aren't seeing. My position: a) this deal wasn't done for bragging rights b) the benes of this acquisition are a sweet ace up the NEM sleeve c) weakness in POG dead ahead as BoE wraps up and Switzerland cuts loose is going to make NEM the fun short-term gold equity trader ole ABX usta be. d) time to accumulate for long term using POG weakness and capturing option premiums IS MY strategy using the NEM game for the next 10 years or so, maybe longer I love the deal, I like the management, and this is getting a serious look from me both as an investor and a trader that an Anglo win just couldn't inspire---At Least In Me You say poTAtoe and I say poTAHtoe...the point is that both of us get to the bank with more than we have now, yes?