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 : Donner Minerals (DML.V) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Pakstas who wrote (6372)	7/29/1998 7:29:00 PM
From: Stew	Respond to of 11676

Excellent Ed! One for the "Commies" <ggg>.

To: Ed Pakstas who wrote (6372)	7/29/1998 8:06:00 PM
From: Elizabeth Andrews	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11676

Dearest Ed, The short answer to your post is zero and yes Inco is stupid based on the way they got into the DFR deal among other things. If Inco can not show that they have an interest in the property it can be expropriated without compensation. They do not own the minerals in the ground or the surface rights. If they did they would have told Tobin to get lost a long time ago. The compensation on expropriation is only a statutory obligation if you can show you have an interest in the property. Fee Simple Title does this but an exploration or a mineral claim does not provide for that. The resource, yes, all that copper, nickle and cobalt is owned by the people of Nfld. Inco paid all that money for the right to mine it IF the gov't gives them a permit to do so. Please check this out. I'm not kidding. They don't have fee simple title and I'm sure that DFR couldn't provide that as they never had it either. Unless you own a Crown Grant you have no interest in the property. It's true for most Canadian properties and companies. I'll expect an apology and a beer when you verify for yourself that I am correct about the law in this matter. By the way, I'm one of the few women who likes beer.