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 : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Taikun who wrote (7803)	10/5/2004 9:26:59 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

No idea for ERF. I thought I read somewhere they had a special deal, exempting them from the requirement. I'm probably wrong.

To: Taikun who wrote (7803)	10/5/2004 11:13:17 PM
From: jayhawk969	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

My read is that the established trusts have until 2007 to deal with it. There are studies that may support the fact that this may be bad legislation. EEE because it was new had to deal with it from day one with January 2005 as drop dead date. HLB report 8.12.04 that you posted was very effective at laying out issues and timeframes in 32 pages. caif.ca

To: Taikun who wrote (7803)	10/6/2004 4:13:56 AM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11633

Re: ERF Non resident ownership was 64% before the Chevron deal. They issued about 9.8% new stock to Canadians only to pay for the deal. Current non-resident ownership is now about 57%. If about 90% of the Canadian holders sign up for the DRIP, they should make <50% non-resident before 2007, assuming the yield stays around 9-10%. Another deal, or even a smaller deal and increasing the drip discount a little beyond 5% should fix the problem. According to their website, previously to the new law ERF had some exceptions to the non-resident rule.