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: Confluence who wrote (1134)	5/15/1998 9:42:00 PM
From: cruncher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Confluence: I have asked the same questions. Saturday, May 9 1998 2:04PM ET Reply # of 1134 Gull: Motivation for your activity. 1. Save us from the evil rath of Southern Era. 2. Your trying to get cheap stock with no success. regards cruncher P.S. If either of these reasons are not valid, please tell us the real reason for your participation. His answer was as follows. Saturday, May 9 1998 2:36PM ET Reply # of 1134 1.What does rath mean? 2.If the stock dropped any lower... For some reason he seems to know the outcome of this and as he answered my question #2, he would like stock but cheaper. Only a Observation cruncher

To: Confluence who wrote (1134)	5/16/1998 6:23:00 AM
From: GULL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

To what do I owe the honor of being addressed as Mr.Gull? Confluence ,who started all the baiting and slander? Refer to all the postings,just because I had a different viewpoint ,I became the target of all sorts of attacks. Who really cares who I am? I note that no-one has EVER questioned the integrity or background of anyone one this thread apart from GULL and INFOMAN? Some answers to your questions; The heirs were never offered equity in Marsfontein. I haven't any idea of exactly who Minister Maduna saw last week. He is a very busy man and is constantly seeing all sorts of people. I am quoting directly from INFOMAN as regards the bequeathment of the mineral rights etc...his DD is a matter of public record. "C BACKGROUND: MINERAL RIGHTS AND HEIRS 1. Several years back J Kruger, JF Naude, FAJ Grimbeek and H Skok took transfer of the relevant portions of the farm Marsfontein. They immediately sold the farm, subject to the reservation of the mineral rights in their favour. At that time, it was not necessary to take out a separate title deed in respect of mineral rights. 2. The condition reserving the mineral rights was carried forward every time the property was transferred. The latest title deeds containing the reservation was registered over the period from 1981 - 1983, in favour of the South African Development Trust (the owner of the property). 3. As a result of the manner in which mineral rights were registered prior to 1937, it was impossible for an Executor to do a mineral search if he did not have the description of the property. This is an everyday occurrence and the Deeds Registries Act specifically makes provision for these cases in Section 71 thereof. 4. It happens often that estates have to be reopened to reflect additional mineral rights that have not been dealt with when the estate was administered, because no separate records were kept by the Deeds Office in respect thereof. 5. When the heirs came to know about the mineral rights, the records of the Deeds Office were scrutinised and it appeared that the mineral rights still vested in the estates of the original four mineral right holders. 6. The Master of the Supreme Court appointed a new Executor in each estate to deal with the Mineral Rights. 7. In the first instance, the Executor applied for separate Certificates of Mineral Rights. This was done from the 1981 - 1983 title deeds, where the Mineral Rights were still reserved. 8. After extensive research into the correct procedure to be followed, NGS, a realisation company, was formed. A valuation of the Mineral Rights was done by the DME as at date of death of the four deceased holders. The Master of the Supreme Court exercised his discretion and consented to the sale of the Mineral Rights to NGS. Transfer duty was paid and a formal application was made to the Deeds Office to expedite the registration of the transfer of the Mineral Rights." I believe that this answers many questions regarding wether or not the mineral rights belong to the current heirs and proves that they could not have been disposed of as they then would have been registered in the new owners name. Point 8 also answers nempela as to the R2800 figure which he tried to imply was a greedy ploy by the heirs. Amazing co-incidence that Vaughn thought that SUF would take a stand and voila:a posting by CJ in Business Day and nempela on this thread both using similar phrases etc... The agreement with De Beers is confidential. However no-one has really read the posting by INFOMAN on the lengths that the heirs went to in trying to avoid litigation by offering SUF the opportunity on 8th January and thereafter to settle the whole issue amicably. De Beers are the major force in the diamond industry and I am sure that their viewpoint and motivations are globally orientated and long term. I wish you all the best and a positive outlook is always beneficial. P.S.I am sure that De Beers will start mining asap.