RE:RE:You may find this link* interestingWhere did this come from? I have never tried to relitigate case number 1. AMK won that case. I don't know if Teuton or AMK is "cooperating" or not; I would assume they are not talking to each other since there is pending litigation and any lawyer worth his salt would advise the parties not to speak to each other till that is resolved; that's basic common sense.
I speak only for myself. I may agree with another poster or disagree. I don't have to state where I diverge or agree with each post.
For years I wanted the case ended by settlement and I repeatedly posted that sentiment; that never happened.
All of us who post here have an incomplete set of facts. I don't know what contacts the parties have had, except for the ones (or one) publicly set forth in a news release. It sure seems like there's very little back and forth. Since that offer to arbitrate, I haven't seen anything publicly offered to end this thing.
So the stalemate continues and all we do is write about it. All I can do is project what might happen post-litigation #2 and that is guesswork.
Listen, Misty, I'd be thrilled to see this legal battle end and exploration begin, but does it really look like that's what the parties want to happen? Does Teuton want AMK as a partner? Does AMK want to work with Dino? I don't know; do you? Who is the decision-maker at AMK? There is only silence from both companies -- publicly. Do you see that changing?
It's all well and good for Misty, me or TI to "speak for" our respective investments, but we have no authority, no idea what is in the minds of our respective managements. If I'm wrong about that, I'd surely like to know just which ones of us have the ear of management!!!
If I look at this case from the point of view of an AMK shareholder, I understand their frustration; years were spent trying to get Teuton to honor what was a clear-cut contract and the court agreed. Teuton did not agree but has paid a huge price as well. Nobody is happy; both companies have lost valuable time and money, and I think TUO has taken even more of a hit.
The question now is -- in my opinion -- do you light a match and try to burn down both companies by continuing to litigate or do you do what Misty suggests; try to work out a JV agreement or some other arrangement where the two companies can go their separate ways???
One idea I've had is to create a Newco that would own only the tunnel rights to Treaty Creek with both companies owning most of the shares in that company. It would have an independent management. They would negotiate a tunnel deal with Seabridge for cash and a per-ton ore rate with each company owning shares in the Newco. Hey, just a thought. If you don't talk, you don't get anywhere.
So I agree with the "new" Misty: Let's "make some money now."