We all have our views on arbitration whether it should have already been filed or not.

Some believe if arbitration is filed then it will automatically trigger the noteholders. From my own perspective (could be wrong) is that the dispute filed by KRY in which they would pursue in IA is the fact of the permit being denied. The IA would have nothing to do with their current contract with the CVG in which they have said is current. Even the Noteholders argued that KRY should have already filed for IA but that could be self serving on their part. Thus just the filing of IA by KRY would not trigger the noteholders because the contract is still intact and they are disputing the permit.

The beauty of it all if KRY filed for IA is -

GRZ filed for their IA and immediately had the property or concession seized. GRZ had concessions KRY does not. GRZ's main concessions overlying the main deposit expired and not renewed thus making it impossible for GRZ to get to the gold.

KRY on the other has a contract and big difference from owning the concessions such as GRZ.

So as RF put it at the AGM last year that VZ would rather work something out than go to IA. If KRY filed for IA it would be a little more difficult for them to just cancel a contract. Think of the underlying negativity this could create for VZ especially with all of the big oil companies ready to make bids on big projects that would eventually involve contracts. It wouldn't make me feel very good. What would China and/or Russia feel like with any of their contracts?

You rarely see KRY in the official news from the gov't. When was KRY actually mentioned by Chavez or for that matter Sanz? Do you think there is a legal issue to that aspect?