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 : Barrick Gold (ABX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mineman who wrote (1168)	4/19/1999 11:39:00 AM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3558

"A clue showing the real reason this deal was negotiated may be found in how Barrick's executives made the almost-unheard-of decision to not include a 'due-diligence' clause in the agreement" I checked this with Barrick - it is apparently standard procedure for a dd. clause to expire when a deal is signed - the spokesman drew a parallel with a house purchase - after closing the purchaser no longer has the right to do title searches. Also, 1) How do you know gold will slip below $280, and 2) why do you assume that the gold has not alreadt been sold forward? - this would be standard for Barrick in this case. dd