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 : AGM (VSE) AROYF (OTC) Ag Armeno Mines & Minerals -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (249)	4/25/1999 7:37:00 PM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 317

Karl Newmont has not acknowledged the law suit by Armeno. This is either by design or by denial I no not which. However, on April 28th, next Thursday there will be an all day hearing in Vancouver in which Newmont will argue for a change in venue of Armeno's suit against them to Colorado from Canada. Should Newmont prevail the chance for Armeno to win its suit becomes very doubtful. On the other hand, should Armeno prevail Newmont will then be forced to acknowledge the lawsuit whether or not it chooses to publicize this fact. As far as any reference to the lawsuit goes, why should giant Newmont give credence to a pipsqueak company like AGM by discussing the suit? Until Newmont is forced to deal with this legal issue it is likely to deny, evade and treat the issue as a non-event. What is surprising about this? Bear in mind also, that should venue be maintained in British Columbia the odds go against Newmont because Canadian courts favor small operators over the big guys. It is possible that Newmont might attempt to further use the "laws delay" following a favorable result for AGM next week. On the other hand, Newmont may calculate that it would be more cost effective for them to attempt an early settlement and buy out Armeno's action against Meruch. Newmont would love to get its hands on Meruchs 20% or any part thereof. In any case, whether an early settlement or a late settlement if venue continues in Canada IMO the odds strongly favor that sooner or later there will be a settlement the value of which is indeterminate, but certainly worth some multiple of the current share price. Regards, Ed

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (249)	4/25/1999 7:59:00 PM
From: Ed Fishbaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 317

Karl On addendum to my previous reponse to you: Newmont plans to begin production at the BATU HIJAU in December. As I see it it would be to their advantage to settle the lawsuit with AGM (again, should venue be maintained in Canada) prior to beginning production. If they can absorb Meruch's 20% (or even the 18% involved in AGM's suit) the cash flow from this interest will accrue to them not to Meruch. Should the law suit drag on for 3 years and then be settled in favor of AGM there is 3 years of lost cash flow to Newmont. It would seem that if their assessment is that there will ultimately be a settlemrnt in favor of AGM, or even if this is likely though not assured, an arrangement whereby AGM acquires the 18% interest from Meruch and Newmont then buys AGM would be very much to their advantage. Consider that a buyout of AGM for shares of Newmont would undoubtedly be acceptable to AGM. In this way Newmont acquires a cash cow in exchange for shares. For this reason I speculate that a settlement will occur prior to December and considerably in advance of December the movement towards such a settlement will become evident. Ed