Re: Time for NOT to make a brilliant chess play

HIGH-GRADE NI-CU-PT-PD-ZN-CR-AU-V-TI DISCOVERIES IN THE "RING OF FIRE"

NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

khareema

Rank: President [?]

Points: 21476 [?]

Votes: 372 Score: 3.6 [?]

Your Vote:

Please Log In to Vote

Did you know? You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)

Re: Time for NOT to make a brilliant chess play

in response to

Re: Time for NOT to make a brilliant chess play

Dennis Sherman

posted on Jun 07, 2010 12:57PM

I wish people would think things through totally before suggesting this idea of NOT taking out SPQ and KWG. What would we gain from it?

We would dilute ourselves by half in order to gain a 53% holding of a huge chrome deposit that CLF wants but could probably manage without if necessary.

We would stand a good chance at getting SPQ, but almost certainly would fail with KWG by virtue of the fact that CLF owns 20% of them, and we would need 66% to succeed.

The end result is we would get SPQ by diluting ourselves by 50% and have a 26.5% stake in a CLF owned property.

The only upside to this would be that it could encourage CLF to up the bid for SPQ/KWG, but there is little to be gained for NOT holders. Better we spend our time and money looking for nickel, and let them fight it out between themselves over there.