RE:RE:RE:RE:Scotia bank Not sure what you are saying about management and "vested interest"??
Two of the board members have quite a large # of shares still. Matlack used to be interim CEO before Huet came on board (look how many shares he still owns over a couple million $ worth!). Schultz still has a ton too.
BoD can get rid of management as they please so best operating management acts in best interests of all stake holders.
BoD have sold 0 since this downturn and have only added. Operating management (Huet et al.) indeed could not turn around TN, but at least they came clean right at the beginning of the year. They could have stopped the bleeding in October, but gave it one more quarter. The operation WILL become viable with a higher gold price, so it's not a total write off.
If you add even worst case at 24 K GOEs from TN and IF they deliver on the other 3 mines, they can still almost come close to making low guidance point and be a few thousand GOEs below 213 K. This was also the quarter with reduced CAPEX spend. And if they got the stockpiles through the mill @ Midas, then it should be slightly profitable.
JIN
Beenthereagain wrote: Will agree with that when (loan/bank) management has vested interest in the viability of stocks they have lent money to or provided them line of credit. Not the case here. Most analysts were blindsided (as were KDX) by the BS surrounding KDX's ability to improve upon past practise at TN.... it did not work. Canadian "gumbo", etc.