RE: HALTED!Mr. Kahana,
I hesitated in replying to your ignorant, idiotic, and emotional comments but decided that you should be set straight.
If you were to take the time do some simple research you would find that SNO terminated the agreement with CGW because of a default on the part of CGW. Your Mr. "Abby" was at fault, not SNO.
SNO's volume is not very large for several reasons. First, the number of outstanding shares is much less than that of CGW. SNO has only 56,449,359 net shares outstanding but CGW has 93,467,648 net shares outstanding. Second, SNO shareholders are long and are holding because they realize that there is a real opportunity to make some big money with this stock. When a diamond mining developer reaches the bulk sample stage there is a 1 in 3 chance that the property will become a mine. What are the chances that a junior exploration company like CGW will develop the Dolly property into a mine when they are only at the earliest stages of development. You don't even have assay results back yet. There's still a long way to go!
On what grounds do you chastise the management of SNO? On the contrary, I compliment SNO's management. They negotiated a development permit with the MVEIRB and are the only ones in this area to successfully do so, they have taken this property to the bulk sample stage in only four years, they have issued only 56,000,00 shares for equity financing, they have made a very lucrative arrangement with DeBeers for processing the bulk sample with no cost or obligation to SNO, and have made arrangements to examine the surrounding property to expand the size of the kimberlite deposit, to name just a few.
I think you should re-examine your investment in CGW then come back here and apologize for your stupid, ignorant comments.
BGT