Re: Clues
in response to
by
posted on
May 17, 2013 06:33PM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
Rumor has it that we are not ignoring the contract. Teck needed more time and that indicates a third party is involved. If this was just Teck they would have told us months ago. No one gains by the delay. In 2 weeks CUU directors could find themselves with summons in hand. They will have to explain lawyer to laywer why it is and get confidentiality agreements in place to settle the issue. However, if a claim is allowed to be registered then we will have a different answer. Something tells me this won't happen. I would think the securities commission is already on top of it due to the number of complaints people have already filed.
I must admit that it must be hard for Elmer these days. Everything he has said has gone completely differently. From the BFS to Teck acting sooner rather than later. If I were him I'd be thinking about putting a match to my office and boarding a plane to Mexico. This must be driving him nuts too. Can you imagine having to go to the AGM and say "nothing in had, soon, nith inning" while looking at a room full of people with ropes.
This was supposed to be an exploration and development gig and now we have to look at mining it. I'm all in favour of a mine but that's going to depend on a lot of factors. You all remember the laughter when I said we'd be talking about this at the AGM? So now what do you think we will be discussing. If I can tear myself away from work I may attend this one just because it will be the most important one of all.