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 Post-Crash Index-Moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (24568)	6/6/2011 11:04:21 PM
From: carranza2	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 119360

I think there have been buying opportunities galore in the last month or so. My read of things is that it will all boil down to a question of Chilean law: Was NGD's right of first refusal properly exercised under Chilean law? My take: yes, it was. After reading the Barrick claim, I see nothing claimed by Barrick which sets forth any limitation on NGD's right to do as it pleased with the interest NGD acquired when it exercised its right. Absent such a limitation, it does not look like Barrick has a worthwhile argument.. Barrick is alleging that the right of first refusal was a sham, that it was really Goldcorp who exercised it. A weak argument, IMO. Its beef, if it has one, is with Xstrata, and even that is not compelling since Xstrata had to abide by NGD's right of first refusal. We shall see. Looking good for NGD, I should think.