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 : Medinah Mining Inc. (MDHM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: craig poppe who wrote (4285)	7/15/1998 9:01:00 AM
From: TomNY	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25548

Craig, even a neutral observer would question Dayton's claims. The fact is that they do NOT "own it all." Whatever you think about MDIN, I don't see how Dayton is all of a sudden a paragon of virtue. This is the same company whose board was tossed out a few weeks ago! As Gary G. points out, there are a number of properties which are NOT in dispute which lie within the boundaries. What about those? So I wouldn't be so quick to believe that Dayton's statement represents "clear facts." Dayton is a company in trouble. I think MDIN's response was quite clear: Properties that are not in dispute but are included in the 1997 Dayton Mining annual report are the Mercedes, Rodrigo, Toro and Gabriella. These properties are owned under contract, by Medinah Energy Inc. and are clearly inside of the published resources and mine plan of Dayton. You constantly question MDIN's intentions and statements, so I ask you to apply the same analysis and questioning to Dayton.