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 Otso Gold Corp. V.OTSO

Otso Gold Corp is a gold mining company. The company's only segment being acquisition and exploration of gold resource properties. Geographically, it has a presence in the Americas and Europe.

TSXV:OTSO - Post Discussion

View:
Post by QuantumPhysics on Dec 12, 2021 12:40pm

740K

Just to help your analysis Kulta, as a matter of fact, The anonymous MKS in the media report is MKS Pamp , a Geneva based reputed refinery player in the gold market. MKS Pamp is the majority shareholder of Pandion. As a highly probable legal fact, The swindling of 740k is gold sent to the refinery of MKS. Proceeds not coming to OTSO is coz the transaction could have been covered under the assumed gold offtake agreement of Raahe Holdings with OY. (Assigned to MKS Pamp by Pandion). Bottomline : High Probability Wessons are Ok on 740K .
Comment by KultaKaivos on Dec 12, 2021 12:55pm
Thanks, that is an interesting possible scenario. I noticed the 500$ discount price in the contract at which Pandion could buy at. The MKS pamp link is certainly a fascinating theory.  
Comment by QuantumPhysics on Dec 12, 2021 1:40pm
500 discount would have been the case if historical debt oustanding wouldnt have been there. So from a legal perspective if 740K equivalent of gold is used to settle part historial debt from a transaction perspective it wlll be considered legal. It should simply come into liability in the statements as 740K less. Point submitted is, 740K transaction might not go the criminal way.