RE:RE:Repost from Zorg on Tuo BBOf all the clowns here you are by far the biggest....
The law says that the ONLY way someone's property ownership can be transferred is to thr government under emminent domain for the use of a public project.
The law says that a mineral tenure that is in place already takes precedence over any LOO or CTT or whatever other alphabet soup you want to use....
Like Doug says (and I've said before as well) the government can't and won't give someone's property to another...it would destroy the safety of our mining jurisdiction and kill any investment here....besides being illegal....
Rudy would like to use that piece of land for his tunnel....and he can IF TUD doesn't have a deposit there....if they do, he will have no choice but to go elsewhere...I get his position....he want clarity....and that's fair...I think for the good of everyone thry should figure that out...but make no mistake....if there is a deposit there, there will be no tunnel...everyone (but you apparently) knows this.
cskhurasu wrote: I listened to this. Rudy mentions the Licence of Occupation and the permits to construct the portals. This is complicated. I am relying on SEA's disclosure in its financial statements being correct. If not, Rudi is goinf=g to have a problem.
The LoO expires in 5 months. Substantially Starrted Status will not occur until 2026. The current EAC expires in 2026 but Rudi is saying they expect the SS Designation this year. The court decision (There was no court decision, just the Ministry's interpretation of existing law) correctly points out that Seabridge has access to TC since the LoO is still in effect, but does not address what happens after it expires or the legality if stepping on Tudor's resources while building the MTT. (SEA is saying the Ministry makes it clear SEA's rights to the MTT do not depend on the LoO but on its reserves)
the LoO does not convert to a Statutory ROW until the MTT is complete.
In the interview Rudy points out that Tudor made several changes to its TC approach with the latest resource estimate. This is similar to what Seabridge did recently when it split KSM into gold dominant and copper dominant projects. That's like the pot calling the kettle metal. (Not the same. Rudi said he can't decide on whether the MTT route should change if TUD keeps changing what it considers to be TC's deposits it intends to mine. KSM deposits are defined).
So I'm still not clear on the time frame between this Sept. and 2026. Who has given SEA access authority to TC during that period of time after expiration of the LoO and with no SROW? (ANSWERED ABOVE). And with the wording of the LoO regarding protection of mineral assets, who has given SEA authority to dig up any Tudor minerals while building the MTT? (SEA has proposed that if it digs up anything of value to TUD while building the MTT said material will be set aside for TUD).
This leads me to believe there will be more litigation after the LoO expires unless a deal is made.(TUD has no rights worth lititgating until it has reserves as the Ministry has made clear) The hard part is that the deal needs to be fair to shareholders of the Amigoes and SEA and also needs to leave enough room going forward for the JV partner and the holders of the various NSR's (TUO and St Andrews Goldfields). Lots of moving parts.
All I see right now are hardened positions. Rudy not willing to compromise on a perfect deal for SEA , KK not willing to give in to that outcome at the expense of TUD shareholders. Both are defensible positions. I personally don't think there will be a break in the logjam until someone with vision comes in over the top, combines KSM and TC into a single project and eliminates ownership questions by owning all four companies and buying out the SAG NSR to make all overhangs go away. I don't see any companies in the free world with the capability to do that, so I'm looking to a company from China quite frankly. There is no way the Chinese will be allowed into critical mineral deposits in Canada and that means KSM's copper.
The courts (No courts involved) have encouraged a deal between the parties. The courts are very much aware that a decision to allow SEA to overrun TUD resources would represent a major government policy change (NOT AT ALL, it's the law now) which allows for the taking of one company's resource assets (no assets are being taken) and awarding them to another company. Say goodbye to the "friendly" mining jurisdiction in BC.
As both companies have tried to spin the court decision in their press releases, it has only made the issues more transparent and obvious.
It could take a great deal of time to sort this out. On the plus side, that would give the POG time to increase .making the eventual outcome better for all. On the downside, delays could cause some of the parties to make rash decisions in the interest of resolutions that might not be in everyone's best interest.
I see volume in Tudor stock recently. Is some group accumulating? Does that make Mr. Sprott a wild card with his stake in Tudor?
Rudy thinks 2024 is the year. If he's right it will be really interesting for all of us. Will KK have any more time after 2024 to sew up Goldstorm and produce a final domain map, PEA, etc? I'm open to input on all of these questions?