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 : Manhattan Minerals (MAN.T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (4389)	6/3/2002 9:36:53 PM
From: russet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4504

This vote tells me the locals want more than a small bungalow in the suburbs,...its clear they want a castle on the hill with all the bells and whistles. Time for Manhattan to move further into the desert to do their exploration. Negotiation is a negotiation! Who really has the aces?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (4389)	6/4/2002 3:13:13 AM
From: charred	Respond to of 4504

Claude, I always question a promoter. I don't believe them. Also I never invest into a company involved in a legal dispute or a social mess like Tambo Grande. Regards

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (4389)	6/4/2002 8:21:08 AM
From: Chuca Marsh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4504

CC I was talking to a bud this weekend on MAN and I decided to buy in after reading the website( I think he was a LONG term CC subscriber and I forgot to so ask him what CC thought LOL Afterall he SOLD BREX when Claude said sell at the high ). I saw the MAP section and the Surface Deposie of GOLd at tri fold economic numbers and said to myself where else can I hyave a large play with some gold at surface with a gazzillion pounds of copper, all ready to be ENVIRON IMPACT study relaesed, I said MAN...and not seeing anything but the first few Monday trades taking it so far down to 1.29 I think the low was, I did the math at 1.35 and purchased a small chunk. This article says, as one you guys have not seen at Yahoo late last night that the Plebicide was funded by an ouside group, QXFAM; and that one thhird of the folks did not show up and then 5 % cancelled that were there and did not vote. I have to think that with the magic 25% figure I was looking for in my MAP review of the squares that were bliocks odd assumed houses on the wensite I reviewed this weekend that I was STILL RIGHT even 75% of the area can be MOINED at SURFACE INITIALT and it still is a cheap GOLD PLAY. "" Manhattan Minerals Corp - In the News Globe says Manhattan calls Peru mine vote "lopsided" Manhattan Minerals Corp MAN Shares issued 39,527,349 Jun 3 2002 close $1.270 Tuesday Jun 4 2002 In the News The Globe and Mail reports in its Tuesday, June 4, edition that residents in the area of Tambogrande in Peru have voted overwhelmingly against the construction of a $125-million (U.S.) open pit gold mine by Manhattan Minerals. The Globe's Allan Robinson writes that Manhattan shares fell 51 Canadian cents or 28.6 per cent to $1.27 (Canadian) Monday on the Toronto Stock Exchange. The project would force the relocation of about one-quarter of the town, or about 1,600 homes, in a heavily agricultural area. About 73 per cent of 36,936 people on a municipal voters' list cast ballots in the referendum, which was conducted by the local Tambogrande government. Of those who voted, 25,381, or 94 per cent, said "no" to the mine proposal, while 347 or 1.3 per cent voted in favour of the project. About 4.7 per cent of the ballots were either cancelled or were blank. Manhattan chairman Lawrence Glaser questioned the results. "The vote is so lopsided, one would have to question the credibility of those numbers," he said. A municipal referendum does not have legal weight in any decision by the federal government over whether or not to approve a mine development, says The Globe. (c) Copyright 2002 Canjex Publishing Ltd. canada-stockwatch.com old url (better for printing) "" Last Nites NR biz.yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- The vote was full of flaws. It seems suspicious that 93 or 94 percent voted 'no' but that 10,000 people didn't turn up. We have to assume that means that those (absent) at least want to hear more about the project," Roberto Obradovich, head of the local unit of Manhattan, told CPN radio..."" and it goes on to say will BUY THEM new homes...in my take it will be 5 years before they ask them to move out of the OLD homes, it will take a no brainer to say that there is plenty of 75% areas to work on first...IN FACT it must be said that NOW I suspect that there is NO MONEY to help this villiage at all, UNLESS gold gets mined. And the locals are politically astute enough to see a PIEE in the sky but not astute enough to see that they are their own worst enemy if they block this mine, as a junior can NOT finance antTHING if opposition is viewed as it is now. Failure, what we have is a failure to communicate ....the words, YOU SCRATCH MY BACK, I scratch yours. Right now, MAN has no fingernails and can not afford a massaust(sp) Laughts. But then again, it is The MINE PERMIT and ENVIRON PROCESS that only counts for July Reports hey? That is my play til July something. Any words of advice to a guy who bot in WHO DID NORT READ any of these news or the VOTE news before he bought at the LOW for the day? Atleast I didn't sell my Goldcorp or National Gold awaiting a scaled down prefease/audit less grand ( hey that is an idea is it not say 75% Enviornmental Impact study and LEAVE out those HUTS alltogether, bad boy Chuca !) study to do my purchase which was left over moneys in an account. Laughts. Chucka