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 : Mongolia Gold Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (2854)	11/20/1998 1:12:00 AM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4066

Bob, lets replace all Clintonian stuff with on target facts. First all questions and concerns have to be clearly understood. Answers and replys can then be make for a precise match. The clearer and more direct and precise the question, the easier it will be for the responder to give a reply to satisfy the person asking the question, and in the same way, answers to advoid answering will be easier to identify. So Bob, in you reply to Dave, you expressed concerns that took the form of questions and opinions. You then asked others on this thread to join in and discuss these issues. Ok, but if you want non-Clintonian returns, then you have to expand more on your post, to put facts down in the same way that you want facts presented in return. No wiggle room question means no wiggle room answer. Vague in, vague out. If you want facts and figures, ask for them in a request, not a question that implies "things are not correct". I copied from your post, presented below. I'am sure you and Dave and most others on this thread understand much much more of what being talked about than I do, but so that others can also join in, please expand out your post. Thanks, and follows are from your post. (1) How the claim can be made that the limited operation of the mill proved (confirmed) anything, except that there were problems and that it was worn out to begin with, is absolutely beyond me. (2) The duration of operation and the net production says only that there were huge problems that some may think they know the answers too. (3) Sorry, the spin in the release reaffirms my worst fears of MGR. Bob, you asked me in another post, my actual holding in MGR. My aveage for 80,000 is around Canadian 12 cents, US 7.5 cents. So as of present, I'am in the looser catagory. But Bob, where I hold each share at 12, you can get at 7, or last week 5. Doug

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (2854)	11/20/1998 5:31:00 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4066

BCB, I note here that there is no 'sale' in the real sense of the word. To say that the asset was sold for $3 million is a fiction and no way on earth should MGR make an equal offer. This would be like buying the banks position at 100% face value. Now the bank has it's positon of 51%, and as a deep pocket partner can be expected to ante up it's share that MAC could not? The partnership obligations are not terminated with a 'sale'. Now if the bank will be a good silent partner and pay it's share and work can go on than all might well be fine. What if the bank wishes to hire 20 cronies to totally consume any profits/cash flow? How muc operating control will MGR have? Will the bank attempt to assert control via it's 51%? Many questions here. However one hopes that the bank will have deep pockets and if they ante up the unpaid MAC share, good, however this could be a thinly disguised attempt to steal the operation, and in that case it will have a chilling effect on all future Mongolian mineral development with foreign partners. Bill