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: nempela who wrote (1306)	5/28/1998 6:50:00 AM
From: Confluence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Thanks for a thoughtful posting. It is interesting how our two spin doctors for the "heirs" regulary switch context, use incomplete information to bamboozle, mislead, etc. and then lack understanding as to why most others are frustrated by their propaganda. I thought that perhaps it was the same person using different log-ins, but the huge difference in grammar and sentence structure points to two different shills. (Infoman, that was a backhanded compliment) I have a copy of Maduna's speech from last week, but no scanner, so I emailed the DME for an online copy. Here is the response: "At this time, the Minister's budget speech is not in a format to be e-mailed to you. I am not only busy with the corrections and changes to the speech but also making arrangements with our IT section to have the speech available on the internet. I will let you know what the address to this is as soon as we have it available. Please be patient until early next week." While this seems very slow to most Canadians, perhaps it reflects a different pace of life in RSA; Here we can find information like today's Financial Post online and easy to access; in RSA it seems as if there is a more "methodical" way of doing things. Maybe this goes to explain a lot of the recent developments regarding SUF: both sides are ready for court action, both sides drop their actions together, De Beers appears to have an agreement to pay the "heirs" but is holding off paying, SUF puts out a press release and suggests that shareholders "read between the lines", that the "heirs" are "non-plussed", Maduna makes a very important speech to parliament emphasizing the very situation in which SUF finds itself......and we wait. Most Canadians probably begin to think "no news is bad news", but I believe that things are happening at a different pace than we are comfortable with. For those who are long term shareholders, what trouble is a couple more weeks? Confluence

To: nempela who wrote (1306)	5/28/1998 8:14:00 AM
From: Goalie	Respond to of 7235

Nempela -- You are to be applauded for an excellent post! Thanks.

To: nempela who wrote (1306)	5/28/1998 1:43:00 PM
From: GULL	Respond to of 7235

nempela I challenge you to refute that this is an official DME release: "MEDIA RELEASE TO: ALL MEDIA FROM: DEPARTMENT OF MINERALS AND ENERGY MINERALS AND ENERGY NOT TAKING SIDES IN SOUTHERN ERA DISPUTE Recent reports in local and Canadian newspapers that Minister Maduna is backing Southern Era in its attempts to secure diamond rights are based on an unfortunate distortion of facts. The Minister and the Department are not supporting any particular party in this dispute. Local reports are apparently based on an article which appeared in The Financial Post Daily (Toronto) of 23 April 1998, which quotes from a letter which Minister Maduna wrote to a reporter of that paper. Minister Maduna's letter was in response to a request in January this year for clarity on certain issues pertaining to the Marsfontein diamond-rights dispute which at that time received wide publicity. The information contained in the Minister's letter obviously related to the situation at the time, particularly with regard to a court interdict preventing him to proceed with the processing of Southern Era's application. This was at a stage when the Department was still in the process of discussing the issue with the affected parties, including the heirs to the deceased estates holding the mineral rights. The interdict was based on the argument that the Minister would not have a discretion to decide on the matter in terms of section 17 of the Minerals Act and that this section is unconstitutional. The Minister therefore indicated in his letter to The Financial Post Daily that it was his intention to oppose the interdict. This has now erroneously been construed as if the Minister was taking Southern Era's side in court. Subsequent events have since changed circumstances completely. The heirs have taken session of the mineral rights and the interdict has been removed. Southern Era and the heirs are still involved in legal proceedings and it would therefore be totally inappropriate for the Minister and the Department to take sides in the matter. END" P.S. I posted the entire Section 24 on April 21st # 901. Maybe you haven't noticed that the Section 24 is not a new tack but old news.

To: nempela who wrote (1306)	5/28/1998 2:50:00 PM
From: INFOMAN	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7235

You are having trouble substantiating information as your so-called 'research' is clearly lacking. You have not referred directly to any issue or point for that matter regarding the M1, but have only attempted to support your argument with vague generalisations and subjective quotes from a Minister. You have stated in your post "In a nutshell, expecting the constitution to suddenly produce R100 Million for an heir is unrealistic". Where was it ever stated by myself that the heirs were looking to the Constitutional Court to produce R100 million for the heirs. The current laws are quite adequate to ensure the rights of the heirs. I am quite sure that the Constitutional Court's is not there to assess property value. How come you constantly refer to constitutional experts when you yourself have no idea what the workings of the Constitutional Court are. You obviously have not given these experts the correct information. You err again when you quote a figure of R100 million when it is common knowledge that the proposed offer by SouthernEra is R75 million ($15 million). Is this the valuable research that you are constantly boasting about? You made this mistake twice. Withdrew, lost, capitulated, abandoned ...... it really adds up to the same thing no matter how you try and cloak it. Whichever way you slice it, SUF had no case and withdrew, it's as simple as that. You state that SUF were "very astute in dropping the Section 17 lawsuit". Would you say that this was a tactical withdrawal, advancing in an opposite direction or just losing their argument? Only a fool would pursue a particular action when it is so evident that the cause was lost. That is probably the only smart thing that SUF has done in this whole matter. I am sure that some shareholders do contact companies on a daily basis "to figure out what's going on" but I have my doubts that you are one of them, as the contents of your postings are so inaccurate. Perhaps you should phone one of the shareholders who are more up to date on this matter (maybe Gull). I eagerly await your future postings on information that you are going to 'dig' for. This "information in days long" will not result in the effects you so desire. The opposite will be true as there is still much to be said which I have to date not mentioned.