A Wells Fargo Stagecoach Robbery?
posted on Mar 31, 2010 02:02PM
Edit this title from the Fast Facts Section
What is the true potential of zone 350? It seems that minority shareholders are only getting the information supplied to them by the majority owner of the mine who selects what they want them to know. What does the senior geologist have to say about the new zone? Is he or she making any professional forecasts? If that person is, then minority holders aren't hearing about it or Martin is just not releasing it to us. Is this person only sharing their thoughts with the majority owner? Why all of a sudden when years have past since their past takeover attempt does Richmont want to make another go at it again? Does it have anything to do with zone 350?
What was all that upside activity about in April of last year when the shares traded higher to $1.72, especially, when gold had been weak and was approaching $850 and coming down from $1000. Now gold is higher at about $1115 and the Richmont wants the other shares in an all stock deal for about $0.76?
IMO, Richmont never glorified Louvem Mines in a positive light because it was all about their intention to eventually obtain the balance of the shares at below realistic values. Who would be better positioned at making an inferior offering for shares along with minority holders not being the wiser than someone on the inside track?
And what was all that selling about from TD Securities and the Anonymous broker starting at the top and their rebuying all the way back down to about $0.35 a share? I guess you would have to ask the Scotia broker what all his buying was about. Maybe, Scotia had done the research of all the property's true potential determined by expected higher gold prices based on the excessive money printing by central banks, especially the Fed. If you keep things simple, it was all about the naked short selling. These two guys, especially TD, butchered our stock while gold traded higher from just north of $850 to over $1200. All of TD's selling and buying was witnessed carefully as their profits through manipulation via naked shorting kept expanding. Isn't it odd that after their suspected 100% cover that the announcement concerning zone 350 was made?
Richmont states that they have contacted the minority ownership concerning 54% of the shares and they have agreed to accomodate their offer. We own a good chunk of shares and no one ever queried us. Since the stock hit $1.72 on no related company news releases, I suspect the share exchange ratio should be closer to 4 to 1 as opposed to the 5.4 to offer. Also as mentioned many times here, due to an almost complete news blackout from Louvem Mines by their majority owners, the general public has been pretty much been kept in the dark concerning our company and its potential. This is never the case with companies exploring their properties, they are much more upbeat. It is the view here that minority shareholders have been compromised from full realization of their asset's value in the marketplace by the majority owners of the mine and also in their ownership in the adjacently owned properties.
Just because the shares are up from the bottom doesn't make this a great deal at 1 Richmont share for each 5.4 shares of Louvem, especially with the great dilution from future participation in the Louvem properties as gold reaches for continuous all-time highs in the many months ahead as is supported by many industry experts.
If the so-called 54% Louvem shareholders really support the takeover then why aren't they identified? Why would they want to give up their leverage? Trading your Louvem shares for Richmont shares is like receiving cash and then reinvesting it back into Richmont stock. Why would anyone want to do that, especially the large remaining shareholders of our stock? Richmont has been stumbling around for a long time without too much success. Their only really proven operating asset of significance, along with outstanding exploration potential, is the Louvem Mine. How about the money that got spent in Colorado with no results, a complete loss. How about the other really successful juniors working in Quebec? How About Osisko Mining, for one. There are many juniors on the radar screens of big golds for acquisition but Richmont never appears. Why?
I will take my chances with Richmont on a 1 for 4 exchange basis on my shares, not the attempted Wells Fargo stagecoach heist ratio at only 1 for each 5.4 shares.
My February 4th, 2010 entry
"It would not be unreasonable for one of the new board members of Richmont to ask the question, why don't we own 100% of Louvem Mines? Could this be the reason for a blackout on positive assessments from our leader? Could Richmont be planning to acquire the remaining balance of the shares not owned for below realistic values from minority shareholders? If it is, it wouldn't be the first time that minority holders were put on the chopping block."