Stockhouse.com uses cookies on this site. By continuing to use our service, you agree to our use of cookies. Cookies are used to offer you a better browsing experience and to analyze our traffic. We also use them to share usage information with our partners. See full details.
I Agree
×
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

Privacy Policy | Disclaimer

Sign In

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

or

Privacy Policy | Disclaimer
Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

Return to Login
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

Seafield Resources Ltd V.SFF

Metals & Mining Industrial Metals & Minerals


TSXV:SFF - Post by User

Seafield Resources Ltd
Bullboard Posts
User Avatar Image
(0)
•••
Comment by scanidoon Dec 09, 2010 11:26am
375 Views
Post# 17823721

RE: RE: RE: Anon.Jitney and Canacrap buying steady

RE: RE: RE: Anon.Jitney and Canacrap buying steadyI don't understand why they would want a lower PP though? Wouldn't they want a higher one for more capital?

Can someone please explain why they would want a .50 vs .60 private placement? In the company's interest i would think they would want a larger PP.


Bullboard Posts
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities