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.

Vanstar Mining Resources Inc. V.VSR

Vanstar Mining’s Nelligan gold project joint venture with IAMGOLD (25% VSR/75% IMG), located 60 kilometres SW of Chibougamau, Quebec. Vanstar retains 25% undivided non-contributory carried interest until commercial production. Nelligan is one of Quebec’s largest gold projects containing approximately 5.6 Moz of gold. Vanstar has signed an LOI with IAMGOLD to acquire a 75% interest in their Bousquet-Odyno property. The project is 6km from IAMGOLD’S Westwood mine.


TSXV:VSR - Post by User

Post by Talhaseeon Dec 13, 2023 11:44pm
219 Views
Post# 35783681

VMNGF

VMNGFJack Sprat - yes,  I am sure many others would like to see Garland's comments as well, myself included. 

Further to John Kaiser's report - one thing we have to consider which John mentioned is 
that IMG could possibly demand VSR's participation in any further drilling in the Nelligan area - something I guess we as shareholders were not aware of as we are not privy to the agreement between IMG and Vanstar, but obviously John got this information from VSR management. 
Our 2 million in the bank would soon be gone, and IMG may not demand this but now we know there is a possibility of this happening.  This would not bode well for the shareholders.  

I still question VSR's management decisions - why did we drill Bousquet with VSR money just to hand it back to IMG and receive llittle or no value for Bousquet? I strongly question why the royalty was not treated separately into another entity?  

I was planning on voting No, but now I question that decision because of John's comments.  I do lend weight to John Kaiser's review of the overall situation.  
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>