Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

High River Gold Mines Ltd HRIVF



GREY:HRIVF - Post by User

Post by stevehrgon Nov 20, 2012 12:46pm
357 Views
Post# 20622481

Why Nord's Offer is not fair to HRG Shareholders

Why Nord's Offer is not fair to HRG Shareholders

I have created a SHAREHOLDER ACTIVIST WEBSITE which outlines the data points from my research as well as Chris Charlwood's press releases. It describes my analysis with respect to Nord Gold's $1.40 offer.

www.highrivergold.net

This website explains my belief that Nord Gold must increase their offer to above $ 4.00 per share to reflect peer valuation. Even at this $ 4.00+ price, I see other issues which lead me to believe that the offer should actually be higher than that.

1: A tax consequence issue whereby even a fair offer requires shareholders accepting Nord Shares are deemed to have sold shares, thereby requiring shareholders to sell Nord Shares to pay capital gains taxes, thus reducing the upside in Nord Share total gains in the future.

2: No Canadian Listing for Nord Gold, thereby increasing trading costs, reducing oversight of Canadian Regulators

3: No concrete plan for a London listing, and the reduction of Mordashovs' holdings below 75%. Based on how Mordashov has treated shareholders within HRG in the past, it would be most appropriate to see him be a minority shareholder with actual independent shareholders, including, I believe, a representative from Sprott.

4: No value for Prognoz Potential value or even its present true value.

5: No transparency with respect to the present court case of Prognoz and how/why and under what circumstances the present HRG shareholders with Prognoz relationships agreed to have their shares exchanged for Nord under the lockup agreement. Meaning, what 'deal' was provided to them under the table? What are they expecting? How would this affect Nord in the future?

6: Answers to my earlier email sent to HRG with respect to my concerns on how Paradigm calculated the Peer value metics. No response was received even though this was sent directly to HRG's CEO and I confirmed receipt with him.

We will see how this plays out, and I am aware of the percentage of minorities who have agreed to NOT TENDER until true peer value has been reached. This is a hostile takeover by the majority insider and as such, I do not believe that Nord Gold has the right to pay anything less than fair value.

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>