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.

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum Skeena Resources Ltd T.SKE

Alternate Symbol(s):  SKE

Skeena Resources Limited is a Canadian mining exploration and development company. The Company is focused on revitalizing the Eskay Creek and Snip Projects, two past-producing mines located in Tahltan Territory in the Golden Triangle of northwest British Columbia, Canada. The Eskay Creek portal consists of eight mineral leases, two surface leases and various unpatented mining claims totaling 6... see more

TSX:SKE - Post Discussion

Skeena Resources Ltd > FYI...spoke with Katie at the company...
View:
Post by metalhead666 on Nov 23, 2022 4:57pm

FYI...spoke with Katie at the company...

I made it clear that I am not happy with this latest mis-step.  She is not the person to speak to on this matter so I'm trying to contact Walter or the BOD directly.

Basically she said that an appeal was in the interest of all mining co's in BC as it (the judgement) sets a bad prescident. I explained to her that the company was perfectly welcome to pursue reforming Crown mining law on their own time with their own funds but that shareholders have no interest in taking some moral or ethical stand. I explained to her clearly that a resolution to this asap is ONLY in the company's and shareholders best interest as part of something is better than nothing. I explained that ANY resolution that put those ounces on our balance sheet makes future dilution less of an issue. I asked if Mr Mills had ever put a number out there and she either couldn't or wouldn't say. Doesn't matter....there's 300 million $$$ just sitting there waiting to be scooped up. If they gave Mills a check for 50 million we'd still be getting $250 million worth of gold. If they gave him a royalty stream...so what? We get hundreds of millions in additional value instantly added to our market cap.....All seemed to not really register with her. She said she would pass along my complaint.

In short this seems like some holy mission to prove a point and undo the law rather than doing the arithmetic and keeping this strictly a business decision. Now it will be months and they will get an appeals court ruling exactly as they got today. It was worth a shot to instigate the 1st court case but an appeal is just the definition of insanity. There is and will not be any new information. An appelate judgement will be the same as this one.

We have NO claim to all the goodies in the lake. It belongs to Mr Mills end of story.  It can sit there forever if they are both hard headed about this or Mr Mills can be a multi millionaire and we can have hundreds of millions instantly added to our market cap. 

I do not want to be complaining all the time but this really casts doubt on managements ability to navigate issues. There is one and only one resolution....write Mr Mills a big fat check in one form or another and get on with it. You don't need to be a blood sucking lawyer to understand this. It's over. Cut the check. 

Maybe some of you will have more persuasive ability that I do. The company clearly cares more about the industry and what this ruling implies for the future than they do about getting 100s of millions added to our market cap with the stroke of a pen.
Comment by eldreco on Nov 23, 2022 7:32pm
Metalhead, Thank you for your post - but with all due respect, you not talking for me (and I should think a number of others) with this interaction with Katie.  It was beyond her station to comment - and it is a bit unfair to simply report your personal rant with someone who could not respond by making it sound like you were speaking for us all - which is simply not true. Personally, I ...more  
Comment by metalhead666 on Nov 23, 2022 8:54pm
I don't disagree that there is no urgency. In fact it has no influence on the current economics of the project as presented in the feasibility study. However...the company is pursuing financing.....had they resolved this our share price and market cap would be significantly higher. A higher share price means less dilution with the equity portion of any fnancing. So not resolving this and ...more  
Comment by eldreco on Nov 23, 2022 10:00pm
Hmm.  Thanks for reply. Walter is a really good stick-hanler - nothing occurs without a reason.  While I was like-wise a bit surprised at the purshase of the start-up stock - he obviously sees something/knows something that we don't,  Gets the company a seat at the table.  Walter is not in the business to lose money...roll with that. The Appeal was not fruitless - it ...more  
Comment by metalhead666 on Nov 24, 2022 5:23am
The first appeal to the courts after the Gold Commisioner ruling was fine and appropriate.  We lost. There is no new information that could alter this judgement in another court. We will spend lots of money on lawyers and many more months only to receive the same result.  Again...had we cut a deal with Mr Mills instead of going forward with another appeal several hundred million $ in ...more  
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities