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: Andrew who wrote (2995)	4/18/1999 7:25:00 AM
From: maxed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Hi. Andrew. This does seem good for many reasons. Debeers has been screwing S. A. for years and if the price has been too low then they have been doing it to SUF also. So lets say the government says it payback time and really starts to play hard ball. They give a higher value to Debeers and say take it or we are going to take over your operations and keep all the diamonds for our own people. I don't think the average citizen would cry to much for Debeers. The next step would be for them to find a partner who has the experience and plant to get the diamonds out of the ground. Someone in the government says hey what about SUF. They have what we are looking for and have also been screwed by Debeers. They are the ones who took over the Platinum mine and our going to create 920 jobs for our people. This may be a bit of dreaming but look what the Indonesian government was going to do to BRE-X when the thought they had found the mother of all gold mines. Greed can make anything happen. Eddy

To: Andrew who wrote (2995)	4/18/1999 9:07:00 AM
From: Confluence	Respond to of 7235

Hello Andrew, I agree with you that the GDV/de Beers tussle provides upside for SUF. I also think its important to realize that this is part of an ongoing development in the relationship between the government in RSA and our friends at de Beers. de Beers and its mining house fraternity have essentially dictated development in RSA for many years. Few could argue that this was to the betterment of the entire population. So the recent radical changes, plus the upcoming elections, bring the old guard into conflict with the new government, right now. The government wants to been seen as having a tough hand in its relationship with de Beers, while de Beers wants to maintain its old ways. There will likely be continued gamesmanship in the form we're seeing now (de Beers stopping exports -- like they don't have just a little inventory. Notice that this goes to stifle the government argument of higher taxes.), with both sides jockeying for position. With the new rules for mineral rights, a more transparent government, a society trending towards better governmental responsibility, tax reform, etc., many forces will come up against each other in the future. Issues like Alexkor, the GDV, Marsfontein, etc. are all developmental, and thus uncertain. SUF has taken great strides in its relationship with both de Beers and the government. The news that the GDV and de Beers are squabbling, yet SUF still is being paid, speak to this. Be sure that de Beers is dealing with SUF in fair, straightforward manner because the government was embarrased by its laws in the Marsfontein dispute. Watch for the govenment to look out for SUF, provider of 300 jobs at Marsfontein, and 900+ at Messina, two locations where established mining houses sat dormant for decades. That is the main reason SUF ended up with its stake at Marsfontein, and will, IMHO, do future joint ventures in the local area with the empowerment groups, de Beers, other miners, and the government overseeing development of the valuable natural resources. Just my thoughts, Confluence