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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Syncrude who wrote (9508)	7/27/1998 6:16:00 PM
From: Jerry Collins	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10836

Patrick -- You say my statement that Placer probably never seriously considered offering KRY a token sum to make it go away "also can't be confirmed or denied!" As a Crystallex forum lecturer on the finer points of copyright law, you should know that all one has to do is call up Placer Dome and ask the question, which I did. This is what Hugh Leggatt tells me on the record: "There was no serious consideration to doing that at all. The question was raised among ourselves but there was never any question of actually doing it. The thinking was it was shear greenmail. In fact it was stated quite clearly by us publicly that there was no value in settling with Crystallex because their claim was non-existent. So why pay for something that has no value? It's a, unethical and b, just stupid business." Of course, we'll never know for sure if there was or wasn't any such payoff talk at PDG. However, here we have a company spokesman going on the record to say it wasn't, and if events in the future indicate otherwise, Mr. Leggatt has some explaining to do. Jerry Collins CSW