Tudor Gold Corp V.TUD

What BC can expect from Sea

[MarcusA]

Fordster and Stockmoves,

I like your reaction to a recent post, but here is another take on the matter:

All this talk about what Sea "expects" from Tud, what Tud has to "prove" to them, what conditions Tud has to met and so on is deceptive, at best.

All that matters is that Sea can be expected to play by the book, that is to act according to the articles layed out in the LoO.
And this includes a reference to Sec. 50 of the Land Act. I recently quoted this, because I had a look trying to find in the Land Act what Sea and some posters here claim: that Tud now has to do this or that.
I could not find it. They Land Act does not mention words like "PEA".

Hence, to pretend that Sea can dictate the terms and conditions of a possible way foreward is utter nonsence. Mind your buisness or rahter: try to mine your own turf.

Does this make sense to you?

[fordster]

Great point Marcus...and what has indeed changed with Rick Rule, Guru? He has flipped 180 degrees for some reason. I wonder.... Here's CSK first post here on TUD: it was blatant misinformation then and it simply continues... "Re Seabridge Gold and its Treaty Creek Tunnel. Wow, you guys are really uninformed. SEA already has all the rights needed to construct and operate its Treaty Tunnel

[cskhurasu]

All I do is repeat what's in the SEA news releases and other disclosers which I assume Rudi writes or at least approves. I am a shareholder of SEA as I have stated before and have been for more than a decade. 

[MarcusA]

Fordster, thanks a lot for reminding us! So, this corrobortes an observation that we all made, I guess: they repeat and repeat and repeat the same talking points. As if something becomes true just because you repeat it. It also tells us they some here have an obvious agenda.

[Stockmoves1]

Thanku Marcus a Common sense and logical Answer - I concur Sea does not hold the cards on whether TUD will be mined or not mined / time and chance also dictate much / take 15 years ago many mines were not economical and today profitable / In spite of what SEA says they do not hold that card ..

[Signman]

Rudi is claiming he has 6 JVs at the table currently. If we all here know the tunnel is absolutely critical to the any funture mine SEA had planned. And if we on these boards know the LoO reafirms the Land Act that favors TUDs mineral rights. Than those same 6 JVs, assuming they are not functional ret#rded like our own village idiot, also know these facts as well. And would be very interested in

[TCrelave]

Hear hear!  Right side of the mountain.. with the goods!   Good luck to most!

[cskhurasu]

Wonderful stuff, Signman. What you don't seem to understand is that TUD's MINERAL RIGHTS are superceded by SEA'S MINING RIGHTS. Whoever the potential KSM JV partners are, none of them are worried about the legality of the MTT and SEA's ability to procedd without TUD. One day this will become clear to you. In the meantime, there is no conflict between SEA and TUD. They both need to

[TCrelave]

Weird, the wording is forced.. SEA has superior rights and TUD has none.. and '... this will become clear to you.'   and the recent vibe.. Nothing wrong here.. don't comment or make waves..  SEA and TUD have no conflict. No more the infamous '..there is no money for assays or turning of drills.' Now more simply, SEA has it all and TUD none, but SEA and TUD

[Signman]

CSK I could not disagree with you more. SEAs Mining rights can't interfere with TUDs mineral rights as per the Land Act and reaffermed in the recent LoO. SEA can "mine away" as they want.... But it isn't going to punch throught TUDs deposits and sterize them with a tunnel. I honestly can't understand why anyone would expect this as a real posiblilty. If SEA wanted to

[fordster]

There you go again CSK back with your God Father authoritative defiant attitude, when you just got done admitting otherwise....did Rudi biotch slap you back to "king of the mountain"? Man you're talking out both sides of your mouth. You obviously don't get it: You don't have permission nor the permit to actually sterilize Goldstorm....and if you do, you're paying for the

[fordster]

I'd even go one step further and say (IMO) that the JVs out there are indeed worried because you can't get ANY of them.

[GuruNN]

I think it's as clear as day.  No major will make an offer for Seabridge if the tunnel issue is not finally resolved. It would therefore only be logical for every major to have the legal framework examined in detail by its lawyers and to include the legal position of Tudor Gold in the process. And this of course includes the good news about the Goldstorm deposit in general and about CS

[TenTon10]

Maybe you could provide us with some of those unencumbered other mining projects in Canada  of interest you speak of

[CaptainE]

If you're serious then google Eric Sprott's holdings and that will get you looking in the right direction.