RE: RE: tazONE OTHER OPINION:
WHEN YOU HAVE A COMPANY WITH A CAP UNDER 100M SHARES WOULDNT YOU GUYS THINK THAT IT WOULD BE MORE MANAGABLE TO GO AFTER(TAKEN OUT) BY CLIFFS OR NORONT, LETS NOT FORGET KWG IS STILL A COMPANY ON ITS OWN EVEN THOUGH CLIFFS OWNS ABOUT 20% THAT WOULD MAKE 80% UP FOR GRABS AND WE ALL KNOW HUMAN NATURE WHEN IT COMES TO MONEY THE MORE THE MORE AND KWG MANAGEMENT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. T.W. I HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION TOO
I see what you mean TAZ, but I am not sure I agree. Whether 5,000 shareholders hold 400M shares or 40M shares, a suitor would still have to win over the same number of shareholders, no? That's really what any bid is about, isn't it? To convince the most shareholders (not shares) to sell to them?
I do think a R/S would be a good thing here, though it would have to be packaged with something else to hold the S/P steady. Perhaps a post split 1 for 1 DD distribution announced at the same time would help prop us up?
Do we really believe that if Cliff's ends up with FWR anyone will come knocking on KWG's door? Anyone trying a buyout is going to pay a 25% premium on anything Cliff's offers due to what they already own. Does KWG hold enough on its own to attract anyone else with Cliff's already being so near and dear? I think if Cliff's wins FWR we will be pretty much at their mercy. My fear is Cliff's just buys Canada Chrome from KWG and we end up an exploration company looking for new property. Our best scenario might just be if KWG is operated like a subsidiary of Cliff's, and we are allowed to reap the benefits of the whole ROF development.
I don't know, just thinking aloud.
TW