Welcome To the WIN!!! St. Elias Mines HUB On AGORACOM

Keep in mind, the opinions on this site are for the most part speculation and are not necessarily the opinions of the company WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Free
Message: Cueva Blanca eased from us

The information had to be made public and also under TSX Policy, should have been identified in the news release announcing the sale. Not only this, but perhaps against fudiciary duty and shareholders best interests, we were denied the right to "public auction" of this valuable property. These mechanisms of "public auction" are supposed to be a protective measure of owners of any company, including publicly traded companies, so that back door deals are harder to execute and that shareholders of companies are not easily exploited. These provisions, laws, guidance,etc, can be enforced in the line of protecting public interest and maintaining integrity, when they are not enforced, the enforcer is breaking their own laws and is susceptible to legal action. It should in all reality not even come to legal action, whereas it is a distinguishable violation of mandates and/or law.

The fact that there was a historical estimate of the Cueva Blanca, shows that it was concealed from the public upon supposed sale. The TSX were informed of this deal, also with me inquiring a copy of the transaction, where a value of the aquisition/disposition had to be recorded, to no avail. Because of this non compliance to my request, it can be readily suggested that the TSX are concealing pertinent information from shareholders, to which they are duly entitled. One could go as far here as suggesting the TSX as being an accomplice, accessory, or even aiding and abetting, should a crime be established with reasonable evidence.

I will take the liberty of this opportunity to elaborate on the TTAGIT aquisition again.

The TTAGIT aquisition, as provided by the TSX, required shareholder approval. There was no place to register your approval or non approval on the proxies of this coincident transaction. However, we see the TSX granting approval of this aquisition of TTAGIT, suggesting that shareholders approved it, when in reality, not only did the shareholders never have the chance to exercise their voting right on the aquisition, how could the transaction have ever been approved? The TSX was alerted to the particulars of this perplexing situation last April, with no response, nor reprimand nor corrective action.

As documents show, Bob Lachance and Leigh Aitkin were owners of TTAGIT before the sale of 51% to IGD. the total sum they received for TTAGIT was around $500,000- $800,000 from IGD, supposedly with this money being used for advancement of technology to do with the TTAGIT social platform/s. As to date, there doesn,t appear that much has come of TTAGIT, and perhaps a mining company should not have taken valuable dollars from the treasury, when IGD had option obligations with SLI on several properties. As a result of IGD,s treasury being quickly depleted, IGD was unable to execute on its property options it has with us, suggesting that this aquisition not only affected the investors of IGD, but sli also.

I also question the actions of Bob Lachance with SLI. Apparently before the initial drill results came out, and shortly after the China trip by Murry and Duncan, Bob says in an email that he is getting out of SLI if the Chinese become involved. Not only does this statement suggest perhaps a degree of prejudism, but also comes at a conspicuous time shortly before the initial drill results from a property that may be the biggest gold find in history. I know I would not have sold until clear and concise news releases were released concerning the property, and even then in our case, there was little reason to sell. I am quite suspicious of this behaviour when I think of how the stock went from $2.83 while drilling, to around $2.00 before the first ever drill results were released. I will also add here that I find it strange that at least four different funds/institutions seemed to have short positions on the stock prior to the initial drill results being released. Any shorter would have had to be off their rocker to short a stock that could have easily been like Arequipa and similar others. It could have been suicide, and I could see perhaps one institution taking up a short position on a gamble, but I believe the odds are against 4 taking up short positions, it goes against all logic and rationale.

IMO

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply