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

VanEck Semiconductor ETF V.SMH


Primary Symbol: SMH

The investment seeks to replicate as closely as possible, before fees and expenses, the price and yield performance of the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index.


NDAQ:SMH - Post by User

Comment by CEOs1on Jan 26, 2011 8:04pm
368 Views
Post# 18031982

The Teck news release concerns/mis-interpretations

The Teck news release concerns/mis-interpretationsIs it only me, or does the Teck news release read that Mulgravian has an agreement for Marudi Mountain similar to that of  their other properties in the Mulgravian agreements (Black Banana, Sardine Hill, and the GSR proerties):  

-Shoreham shall grant Teck a right of first offer with respect to its interest in the Marudi Mountain Property, and its Black Banana and Sardine Hill properties if Mulgravian Ventures Corporation ("Mulgravian") does not exercise its option to earn a working interest from Shoreham;

If this is the case, then shouldn't this have been a material fact prior to this deal? 

There is nothing in the material notices that the company is required to file which indicates that Mulgravian has a right to earn a working interest in Marudi Mountain.  Is this just something that the new COO and Wallster's directors have arbitrarily decided?  I had no idea that they could just include properties in their deals like that. 

Good on them!   I think I'll just tell the state of Nevada that I own their gold reserves.  Maybe that will work? 

If the above is wrong, someone in that office full of management needs to clarify who owns what, write a retraction, or at the very least clarify for investors what exactly is happening prior to a definitive agreement that could hand Teck everything.   How very unprofessional. 
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>