SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Valuepro who wrote (4455)1/23/1998 2:49:00 PM
From: Bob Walsh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10836
 
ValuePro, you said: "I could be wrong here, but it's my understanding if PDG has any claims for the cost of work done to date, they will have to try to collect from their 30% partner on the property as they are the quasi governmental party which early on, and knowingly,mislead PDG." That is possible. It would depend on multiple factors: the terms of the COW, whether CVG was acting within the scope of their legal chater (or whatever), whether or not PDG knew (which they appear to) that CVG was not acting lawfully, etc.

Regards,
Bob



To: Valuepro who wrote (4455)1/23/1998 11:14:00 PM
From: Gary H  Respond to of 10836
 
VP, I'd go along with that. PDG, ineffect entered into an illigal agreement(knowingly or not)and may or may not be able to make claim on their partner. If they went to court against their partner it may come out that the deal was illigal and they would not have a leg to stand on. PDG's best bet, IMO, would be to sell the goods to KRY. And I should think that under the above, KRY could get a good price.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News