RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: ** GOLD PRODUCER on SALE **I just read the attached article and I finally clicked what was going on with William all those years that we shareholders could not understand. First of all you’re right, it was hard market for commodities so according to article while William was pretty successful at beginning in turn had to close gold mines in late 90s. We still new we (shareholders) had assets that can be revived once gold prices pick up. Instead we started losing those assets through several restructurings and at the end got left with a worthless Shell called Valencia. Now I see from the article, the flagship of William Jacobina was optioned to Desert Sun mining and generated the windfall of money to non-original asset holders. So you, as a Desert shareholders made money on something that we original owners ended up with fraction of a penny on a dollar. My question is: since Jacobina could be revived through Desert why wasn’t it revived through William, original owner of the mine. Article quotes: . And like any good promoter with a handful of companies to choose from, chairman Bharti could not quite be persuaded to choose just one as his favourite.
Question is if the above article comment praises virtue of loyalty and in turn if such an attitude assures at least of an endeavour to create value to shareholders of a particulate entity run by somebody of such virtues. If it can then: good luck longs.