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 : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (22901)	10/26/2003 1:50:18 PM
From: Michael Bidder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 39344

Of course, AQI can say that they had no way to know what was in IMA's confidential agreement with NEM. I do not know if this is a strong defence as they should have sign the same agreement. Perhaps in the run up to delivering the letter AQI and IMA spoke informally or through Lawyers. ...they should have sign the same agreement. Not necessarily, I find that half of the time the other party reads the agreement. In this case they may ask for little amendments. I do it on the spot, we initial it and away we go. Or I show another less inclusive or reaching one.