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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (229468)	11/19/2009 1:04:18 PM
From: joseffy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

Detroit's Famous Pontiac Silverdome Sells For Just $583,000 Silverdome sale price disappoints Pontiac officials wanted more than $583K for stadium Mike Martindale / The Detroit News November 17. 2009 detnews.com Pontiac -- Nearly 35 years after taxpayers spent $55.7 million building the Pontiac Silverdome and a year after a $20 million sale fell through, city officials have sold the arena once called the most desirable property in Oakland County. The price: $583,000. "This was a giveaway," said David J. Leitch, a broker with an Auburn Hills based realty firm. "The property alone, at $10,000 an acre, should have gone for more than that. And you have the Silverdome, its contents, and the infrastructure already in place. I had estimated it would probably go for between $1.2 million and $3 million. I can't believe it." Such sentiments weren't uncommon Monday, after city officials unsealed bids showing the property that was home to the Detroit Lions was sold at auction to an unnamed Canadian company that plans to bring a soccer league to the stadium. The company's name will be released when the sale is finalized within 45 days, said Fred Leeb, the city's emergency financial manager. Leeb acknowledged the sale "is not a windfall," but said the Silverdome's $1.5 million upkeep drained the beleaguered city's finances. "We had hoped it would have brought more, but now the city can be freed of its upkeep and get it back on the tax rolls," Leeb said. Pontiac Mayor Clarence Phillips said he was "disappointed" but knew the city had to shed the costly structure. Councilman Everett Seay said he expects someone -- possibly a prospective buyer turned down in recent years -- to file a lawsuit to block the sale. "The citizens of Pontiac deserve better," Seay said. "This is pennies on the dollar (of what it cost). It goes to show how bad times are ... Worse, we don't even know who bought it." The company, which Leeb described only as a Toronto-based group of real estate investors and a "family-run business," was one of four bidders considered during an auction at the Marriott Hotel. Others bidders were not identified and most left without talking to reporters. One, Mickey Shapiro, a Farmington Hills developer, was rushing to catch a plane. "We tried a bid, but it wasn't good enough," shrugged Shapiro, who declined to reveal his offer. "You win some, you lose some." Dan Courtemanche, senior vice president of marketing and communications for Major League Soccer, said the league wasn't in discussion with any group on placing a team in the Detroit area. "We have not had any recent discussions about having an expansion team in Detroit," Courtemanche said. "We've had very preliminary talks in years past, but nothing in the last six to 12 months of substance." An official for the Canadian Football League said the CFL has focused its efforts on Canada and not expanding into the United States. The 80,300-seat stadium opened in 1975 and has largely remained empty since the Detroit Lions left for Ford Field in 2002. The sale included 127 adjacent acres.

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (229468)	11/19/2009 1:32:14 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

In the US, an EIS is simply a information document. NEPA requires the government to review the EIS, determine if sufficient aspects have been considered, and if so, allows the project to go forward. The law places no duty to implement mitigation measures, it's an option. In California, CEQA requires that an EIR consider all the environmental factors, and actually places a duty on the government to implement mitigation measures to reduce the negative impacts. ISO 14001 is similar to NEPA (although it's not a law), it just requires that the EMS address specific environmental aspects, including: labeling, performance evaluation, life cycle analysis, communication and auditing. It does not require implementation of any mitigation factors. I don't know if Mexican law is more like NEPA or CEQA. But in either case, you can re-do the EIS/EIR if it is deficient. If the NGD EIS is not deficient, but NGD is not meeting whatever mitigation measure are required, then they will have to do so. If they can't operate the mine while implementing the mitigation measures, then that's a serious problem. They will have to appeal that ruling, if they can. Seems to me that they already knocked down the mountain, so if that was the real issue, it's moot. Destroying old mining buildings and shafts seems like a bogus issue, as you pointed out the shafts are hazards. Not sure what else are real issues. .

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (229468)	11/19/2009 4:56:32 PM
From: renovator	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I blew out of my NGDAF warrants today--with a 19% profit since August. It was much higher at one point, of course. Although I think they will end up higher, after working out the political problems and getting production up to speed, there are way too many more immediately promising juniors to stick around. I could reenter if it gets crushed in a general selloff, though.

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (229468)	11/22/2009 8:03:14 PM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I got off the plane in Vegas on Thursday morning to find my PF down much more than I would have liked. Obviously, a quick search told me NGD was the problem. This is the first chance I've had to be on the internet since then (I'm at McCarren). I happened to be copied on an email Heinz wrote on the subject. Here's what he said: political risk strikes. the same group of people who have been trying to blackmail the owners of Cerro San Pedro for the past ten years have won a court injunction again (imo they have bribed a judge). they always lose on appeal, because they actually have no case. i discussed this extensively with Richard Hall, the fomer MRB chairman (the company NGD took over in the merger). this could actually provide a good opportunity to pick the stock up cheaply.