RE:RE:RE:RE:If a offer is madeZorg,
Agree that no way in the world is that tripartite agreement changed. The deal was struck and, as you point out, the whole reason for tuo amk giving up TC was that Tudor would be on hook to funding to contruction. And now people think thats unfair? WahWahWah. Bunch of mining Karens.
As for TC being taken out? Given the size of it, only a handful of majors that would ever consider buying it. Highly likely they would want 100% fromt he get go. Best way to achieve that is acquiring the asset outright. Cash goes to respective companies and is dividened out a return of capital. That will leave a pickup for AMK and TUO who trade at a discount.
Is it possible that someone just buys TUD? Its possible, but highly unlikely. And as you say, that could leave big uspside surprise that they will have to pay for down the road.
stockzorg wrote: TeckPro wrote:
As a TUD shareholder I would not agree to the other 2 companies getting a premium and not having to spend a penny for exploration. Covid has changed everything so the original agreement may need revisited in light of these unforseen circumstances.
In this horrible market I quicker see TUD being sold 1st to a buyer who then calls on the other 2 x 20% partners to find the cash to go into production. They either become JV partners or will guarantee the new buyer leverage to get a better buyout price.
My feeling is that if TUD is sold first it would be great for the shareholders of the other two Amigos. The new owner would continue drilling and finding more gold which would increase the value of TUO and AMK at some pre-production point when they do decide to sell. The nightmare scenario for TUD would be to sell first, then see the new owner hit a Brucejack-style deposit and 5x the value of Treaty Creek with a single press release.
As for revisiting the original agreement, the reason TUD has Treaty Creek in the first place is because they made the existing deal. I would be really surprised if it were to change for any reason.
If TUD is sold first, it still leaves the other two the option of selling later to a single buyer who would then be a 60/40 partner in Treaty Creek. Or, they could agree to fund their portion of development with the 60% owner taking most of the risk and being the operator. They would do this knowing that the really big dollar transactions have been for operating mines like Osisko, Pretium, etc.
I see all three companies being in a strong position (in their own ways).