Post by
cskhurasu on Sep 07, 2024 9:56pm
The AMK Deal
What do we know today that we did not knowl last month. Almost nothing. We know that ES has agreed to the propsal and that GEM has agreed to up its hypothetical line to Cunningham. We also know there has been a Fairness Opinion done which no one has seen yet.
Some Questions
>Does the proposed coin need regulatory approval to be listed? is it a security?
>AMK does not have a divided interest in the TC resource to back the coin. How does this work?
>Once the coins backed by unallocated resource ounces have been sold, can these ounces be produced or do they have to remain in the ground in the condition in which they were sold? Or do some coins get produced ounces as backing while others do not?
>The Fairness Opinion must put a value on TC. Is this methodology consistent with 43-101? If not, can it be published? Shareholders of a public company should be getting a 43-101 compliant valuation.
Comment by
highper on Sep 07, 2024 10:06pm
never mind cunningham....Approximately $36 cdn per oz of gold equivalent for a potential tier one mine in a politically safe jurisdiction is ridiculous... these texans or NYers or whatever bottom feeding predators must think mining people are dumb as dirt... well they are not going to swoop in an scoop up my teuton shares for pennies on the dollar....
Comment by
cskhurasu on Sep 08, 2024 8:08am
Clearly $36 Cdn per oz is very good or ES would not have accepted it.
Comment by
Jetstream1281 on Sep 08, 2024 12:37pm
SEA can kiss their MTT goodbye....highly unlikely that LOO gets renewed.
Comment by
thehammer2 on Sep 08, 2024 3:47pm
This is why IMO they MUST work together with this incredable find. Let's shake hands and make everyone happy. ( GOLD brick wall :) ) TH
Comment by
cskhurasu on Sep 08, 2024 3:43pm
The MTT has no impact on coin sales backed by in ground ounces of gold.