RE:RE:Why does EDGAR confuse? Goodtoreadthis... when doing research on Energizer Resource's Institutional shareholders, I read the https://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=74034809 link.
I was looking for at least 89,231,000 shares to make sure that Goodman hadn't sold or possibly bought more. When the link said that Goodman had 43,516,714 I was concerned and checked further and found the second link https://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=74034823 which showed another 45,714,286 to make their holding 89,231,000 shares and was relieved that Goodman didn't in fact sell.
I was concerned that other shareholders might have had the same initial though and possibly sold.
By my thinking, such info concerning Goodman's August 17, 2016 holdings and should have been published much earlier than March 7, 2017.
That's why the post was titled “Why does EDGAR confuse?”
Also considering Vanadium
https://www.goldenshare.ca/single-post/2016/10/18/Golden-Share-Announces-License-Agreement-With-Battelle-Memorial-Institute
excerpt: Golden Share has been granted a nonexclusive commercial license to produce, use and sell the Vanadium Electrolytes developed by PNNL. The licensed vanadium electrolytes have advantages over previous generations, including a wider temperature-operating range and higher energy density.
Golden Share Holdings getting a non-exclusive commercial license from PNNL is interesting, even though they really have no real attachment to Vanadium except their agreement with Northwest Mining & Exploration Group of China (“NWME”), I wonder if Energizer Resources can get a non-exclusive commercial license from PNNL, based on its future development of the Golden Giant Vanadium Mine or an agreement with one of the vanadium miners on Madagascar?