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.

Viva Gold Corp. V.VAU

Alternate Symbol(s):  VAUCF

Viva Gold Corp. is a Canada-based gold exploration and development company, The Company’s business is the acquisition, exploration and development of precious metal properties. It is advancing its 100% owned Tonopah Project, located in the Walker Lane Trend in Western Nevada. The Tonopah property is located approximately 30 kilometers (km) northeast of Tonopah, Nevada and 30 miles south of Kinross' Round Mountain. It consists of 513 unpatented mineral claims, totaling 10,250 acres, that are located in the Ralston Valley, on the northeast side of the San Antonio Mountains in the Walker Lane structural trend of west-central Nevada.


TSXV:VAU - Post by User

Comment by Pat4Popodopolouon Mar 04, 2021 1:30pm
147 Views
Post# 32716439

RE:Bad deal

RE:Bad dealOur ceo was also involved with Midway - the previous owner of the project along with Fiore's Pan.  What happened to Midway?  How well did shareholders fair with the bankrupcy?  I can only question, as one listener to today's call asked, why GPY up in the Yukon when there are many other superior companies, projects and teams that can add shareholder value?  Couldn't there be substantial savings/synergies with Fiore's Pan?   Our project could greatly benefit in a number of ways.  There are many similar opportunities within Nevada.  The benefits of this combination can be nowhere near the savings to be found within nearby operations.  There has been a pre-existing consulting agreement between our ceo and GPY.  I really question whether this proposal is best for shareholders and question whether appropriate due diligence has been conducted, whether shareholder interests have been priority and whether the nearby, more profting oportunities have overlooked, ignored, or discarded because of the favourable outcome given our ceo?  As shareholders we need to seriously question whether this is anywhere near an optimal outcome.  Why GPY?  Why now? Where are our drill results? and why not a company with at least a potential to create the most synergistic, bottom-line optimal, shareholder benefiting outcome possible?  I am not impressed and yes deepthinker63, I too will vote no.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>