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: DavidA who wrote (1064)	5/8/1998 8:19:00 AM
From: Goalie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

DavidA -- excellent post! But don't waste your words on these two individuals (one who is, or has a mole inside the ministry, to provide disinformation to all, and the other similarly placed but closer to us, and is playing a dangerous game even though she recites nursery rhymes...) -- you can't reason with them; their motive is transparent - lay in the bushes and wait till a company hits something, then pounce on it with the pretense of "constitutional protection" and milk it for what its worth. One thing they fail to understand is that you never choke the goose that lays the golden egg...you just stroke it gently... so it can lay more! They also live in the past... Well, the past is history, folks... BTW... the only thing I learned from these two is to stop reasoning with them... They make statements without backing them up; produce fictional media releases that only they have seen; make allegations that they can't support... and so on! Their credibility is zero, and IMHO as soon as they get their "golden egg", they'll disappear into their caves like bats at dawn... There will be no need for them to participate on this thread and spread falsehoods... they'll be happy to drive their Ferraris and sip their martinis...

To: DavidA who wrote (1064)	5/8/1998 1:22:00 PM
From: INFOMAN	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7235

The DME has recently stated that they are not backing any party in this issue, the case which is to be soon heard in the SA courts. Which public statement from the DME are you referring to. I refer to their latest press release which has been quoted on by numerous papers, and which has also been posted on this thread. The courts ruling will obviously be decided on the basis of any written or verbal arguments put forward by the parties, and how the law should be applied in this respect. It is not a question of NGS hiding behind any applicable laws. Would you then condone SUF acquisition of any mineral rights by stealth. I suspect not. You mention and i quote ' for what we have not done correctly ' Am I correct to infer that you speak on behalf of SUF? If not, then you have also accepted that the procedure SUF followed in attempting to acquire the mineral rights was not correct. I agree. In so far as the relationship between NGS and De Beers is concerned, i am unable to comment as i am not privy to the details reached in their agreement. This is after all an agreement which is confidential. The attorneys acting on behalf of the heirs are most reputable and experienced, and no doubt have worked in their best interests Suffice to say that i am extremely confident that they will win the case. All the available evidence points to a successful outcome in favour of NGS. I will of course, post all the relevant news pertaining to this matter, and those whom are interested, can make their own decisions as to which party followed the ' moral high road '