RE:From CEO.WisGuy1 wrote: @ludbucker Sometimes I laugh my as* off when I see there are people still wondering about whether this is economic. Admittedly, plenty of those are just playing games for whatever their agenda is. Logic exercise, let's all please partake: Regarding Egina, how long would anyone guess it would take to determine continuity and economic potential of a huge area? (of course, once they figured out their method with gpr etc. to highlight the richest spots). So, with at-surface, free-dig gold-bearing gravels, a sunken spot is identified, sample taken, processed, rinse, lather, repeat from spots across a vast plain. How long could that possibly take? My guess would be about one week, possibly two. Point is, see the larger picture as Sumitomo would have done ages ago. They wouldn't be involved if the economics over a vast expanse were in question, let alone be "totally stoked." I know the majority of you don't need this explained, thankfully. For those of you that continue to remain patient, rose petals will rain down on you in due time. I'm hoping a commensurate amount of steamy piles of feces does on those that have spread so much purposefully negative bullshit in here.
Oh Dear....just how naive some people be.
To suggest that Egina has been sampled for tbe benefit of Suminoto and the results were witheld from shareholders is saying QH and Novo acted in an immoral and possibly criminal
Way.
This poster hasnt actually looked into which branch of Sumitomo has invested in Egina. The reasons for Sumitomo investing here become clearer when it comes to light that the company has been identified as allededly non compliant with Australian taxaion rules and investing in a manner that legally allow writeoffs might make things compliant enough to avoid an intensive investigation into Sumitomos Australian investment subdidiary.