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 : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: VAUGHN who wrote (720)	3/16/1998 4:26:00 PM
From: GULL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Hello Vaughn The article in the Financial Post and the contents of your recent letter make for very interesting reading indeed. The question posed by yourself as to how the heirs "corporation" could have registered the mineral rights could presumably be as follows: 1.The specific mineral rights were never registered with any other party but those that appear on the original mineral rights certificates. These rights were inherited by the current heirs as established by DD. 2.When the corporation was registered, the Registrar of Companies in S.A would have picked up any anomalies or irregularities and would have immediately refused to register the mineral rights unless they were sure that all correct procedures had been complied with. I look forward to your comments. P.S.Congratulations on a well presented and balanced essay! Regards, Gull

To: VAUGHN who wrote (720)	3/17/1998 7:20:00 AM
From: Goalie	Respond to of 7235

Hello Vaughn: And, to all: Chris Jenning was optimistic that SUF will eventually mine the disputed M1 pipe on farm Marsfontein. He made his remarks in a television interview on CBC Newsworld this morning. Mr. Jennings, when asked about the M1 disputed mineral rights, said when the company researched the property, it found that the 400 hectar property was registered in the 1920-s. But a search of the estate documents failed to turn up any passage of the rights to heirs, therefore, SUF and partner Randgold, applied for a mining permit under section 17 of the Mining Act. The discovery of a rich pipe followed a court action by heirs, who now apparently formed a company trying to get around Sect. 17 of the Act. Mr. Jennings says this is "a completely new dimension" and SUF and its partner have asked the court for leave to examine "the underlying legalities" of this new move by the heirs, which took everyone by total surprise. Mr. Jennings said the bottom line financials for SUF would be affected by the loss of M1, if that were to happen.However, he added "we hope to mine this in a couple of months, or less" indicating what the weekend FP story suggested that there may be some room to negotiate here. After all this property is less than 10% of the 50,000 hectars SUF holds at Klipsringer. Projections remain that SUF will be the second largest diamond producer in SA after DeBeeres. He also recapped SUF's progress in Angola; the 106-carat stone they found recently; so far they mined approx 23,000 carats! despite heavy rains and they also have a very large pipe (Camafouca) which "will bring SouthernEra very big money". The govt and the political situation in Angola has stabilized, he said. On Munn Lake, he is very confident that "we have a chance for the discovery of a very rich pipe..." which he hopes will provide the Canadian "jackpot" for SUF. He says partner Kennecott has spent $4Million and the overall program will see $5.5M spent on this project this year. "Maybe this will be our year in Canada" he concluded the interview with John Dawe of CBC Newsworld, Business Breakfast Show. I think some parts of the intrvw will be replayed later in the day... since it was live at 6:45AM ET! This afternoon CJ will fly back to SA, I believe, to attend to business there. Goalie.

To: VAUGHN who wrote (720)	3/17/1998 9:08:00 AM
From: Goalie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Hello Vaughn: To answer your question, I believe that the reason for the company registration is that the rights dont have to be subdivided...i.e all 29+ so-called heirs are now one, as in a class action. I say "so-called" because they would have had to prove each individual in court; now its only a single entity in question. However, Randgold lawyers will obviously question the legality of this latest move and when it was registered. Incidentally, did you notice that the lawyer who launched the action claims to be one of the heirs!!!??? Hmmm! Hope this sheds a little light on the subject. Regards. Goalie.