Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thanks JP,
Anybody that has dealt directly with the Chinese knows this, and I am sure Dahlman Rose warned Scott about this. Maybe, Merle should have told us it could take six months.
Can you imagine how that would have been received by some of our "nervous nellies".
I have faith is Scott, but I am afraid he is not the one holding this up.
I Googled "Closing a deal in China", and this is one of the results. This looks like a very difficult and time consuming task.
1. Never criticize the Government.
In the United States, taking verbal shots at the government
is almost de rigueur in business conversation. Not so in China. While savvy
Chinese are well aware that their government has problems, openly criticizing
the government, or even being on the scene of criticism, is a good way to end
up with innumerable troubles when it’s time to make the obligatory
kowtows. “The last thing you want is to be seen as a troublemaker,”
2. Understand the limitations.
There are still many industries in China where the
organization and ownership structure reflects the old communist system. The
government is reluctant to restructure and privatize these firms, possibly
creating unemployment. When dealing with such bureaucrats, you may need to
understand the constraints under which they are working (such as the need to
maintain full employment) in order to understand how to work most closely with
them, according to James Mulvenon, a former China expert for the Rand Corp.
3. Don’t assume the contract is final.
In general, the Chinese place greater reliance upon personal
connections and personal commitments than on what’s written on a
piece of paper. As such, terms that are discussed prior to the signing of a
contract often are only distantly related to the actual terms under which the
deal will move forward. “After you sign the contract, there will
likely be multiple requests to change the terms in order to make the deal more
advantageous to the Chinese suppliers,”
4. Try to cultivate the younger executives.
There is growing professionalism among younger Chinese
executives, many of whom have earned MBA degrees from Chinese and American
universities. Unlike their predecessors, such young executives are more likely
to view business ethics and performance in a way that more closely reflects
attitudes in the United States or Western Europe. They can help you understand
what’s going on in more traditional enclaves of their firm.
rights.
5. Be sure you’re speaking with the real decision-maker.
It’s not at all unusual for a Chinese business
owner to remain in the background and let his negotiator pose as the
decision-maker. This gives the real decision-maker the flexibility to deny any
concessions that he doesn’t like and dictate better terms using your
concessions (which you thought were mutual) as a baseline. “My advice
is to simply walk away from the meeting if you find out they’re
playing this game.
6. Beware of double-dipping.
Local representatives frequently position themselves to get
paid both by the company that they represent (meaning you), and the company
with which they’re negotiating, according to Tim Wang, regional
president of Novellus China, a subsidiary of semiconductor equipment-maker
Novellus. But don’t get too heated if you discover an apparent
conflict of interest. In China, this is not considered a violation of
professional ethics but a natural consequence of being in the advantageous
position of being an intermediary.
7. Enjoy the inevitable banquet.
When you visit China, you’ll likely end up
attending one or more ceremonial banquets, where a wide variety of traditional
dishes will be served. The host earns status by providing unusual or rare
foods, which probably will not be at all like the Chinese food you’re
used to eating in the United States. You’ll be expected to try every
dish, lest you insult the host by refusing. The last time this writer was in
China, the banquets included pig’s ear, which tasted like rank bacon;
turtlehead soup, without a visible head, thankfully; and an item listed on the
menu
Smooth, it is a long way from bankable, but I do not think it is a long way from profitable.
My average is about .05, and I predict .20 by April or sooner.
Just my personal WAG.
Hispeed,
I agree fully with this. We are still in very good hands and will be a lot better off financially in the near future.
How long ago was oil @ $15.00 a barrell?
Great DD as usual DiDi. Good Lawyers are made by Good Clients!
Hispeed, I always thought they were the primary party that Scott was trying to court.
The only thing that surprises me, is that they are playing penny ante poker on this deal. If they are just one of eleven partners, this is chump change for them.
On the other hand, maybe Scott is limiting the amount they can put in now at these rediculously low prices, and there is a much larger investment required as we actually start mining.
I cannot imagine this board without Ontareeo.
He has always been a guiding light, along with Web, whenever the bashers showed up to try to pry some shares free from our death-grips.
FrackingExplained
.mov.wmv?auth=co&loc=en_US&id=104600&part=2
Try this
FrackingExplained
.mov.wmv?auth=co&loc=en_US&id=104600&part=2
Try this
I saw somebody from Dahlman Rose on CNBC, while was at the gym. I could not hear what he was saying, but my guess is it was about commodities.
It was good to see that they are considered worthy of quotes on CNBC.
Thanks for that info Flat Earth. Too my regret, I had stopped watching MGGV when its price nosedived prior to Scott's appointment. If I knew what was going to happen, I could have amassed some really cheap shares.
I started in 2006 with MGGV because I thought it was a uranium play. It appears it went belly up and Scott bought the shell, which became SRSR.
That is all I can add.
I got another 2M today. Some were even after the news release.
Everybody must have been taking a nap.
My guess is ihubbers have 400 million.
There is a new article in Forbes about a Californian, who is developing a new technology to compete with the Chile Oligarchy of Lithium.
This article confirms everything we have known about our position of strength. IF, Luka Erceg's technology works, we will have some competition here in the US. My bet is on our sure thing in Chile.
His will certainly cost more to produce, and they cannot even verify its feasibilty in large production.
Thanks Web. I use Etrade also and have never had an issue with penny stocks.
They also have an "International" account, which I opened, but never needed to use.
Their fees,and services - I am looking at refinancing my mortgage with them- and checking are perfect.
Still waiting for mine in the Atlanta north suburbs.
Today for sure.
Good Riddance!
Still waiting for my pkg. in Atlanta.
Should be today.
Don't feel bad Ont.
Your post last week was an off the charts hit.
Thanks Ont, this is great input. As always.
If MMTE goes to 1/2, I will be very very happy man.
More than 1M. I will vote yes
How would this be different than delivering shares to anybody else, who paid in money for shares?
I think the lawsuit, as described on this board, is just a lot of fuss about nothing.
Your are correct. However, I have received them by USPS and then also been able to reply on line to the same item.
I think that is why there is all the discussion here.
Much appreciated Web.
NORTH AMERICAN GOLD REPORTS
Detour Lake & The Monster of Timmins Ontario
By Sean Mason | 6/1/2011
Gold juniors hope to ride the coattail of Detour Lake success story more than a decade after Placer Dome closed the fabled mine.
Detour Gold Corp. (TSX: T.DGC, Stock Forum) appears set to create a “monster” gold mine north of Timmins, Ontario. The company announced recently that drilling had increased its gold reserves to 14.9 million ounces at its Detour Lake project in the northeastern part of the province. This number could surge to 25.6 million ounce if inferred resources and other area of mineralization can be converted to reserves.
Placer Dome mined the Detour Lake deposit as an open pit between 1983 and 1999, producing 1.8 million ounces, but had to shut down operations when gold fell below the US$600-$650 per ounce range used in the feasibility study.
Detour Gold acquired the property from Pelangio Mines in January 2007, and in just over three years, the company produced a positive feasibility study for a 649,000-ounce-per-year mine. Since this is low-grade deposit, though, it is highly dependent on the gold price. Detour Gold has spent $100 million developing its Detour Lake project since last November and will spend another $400 million by the end of 2011.
If Detour Gold hopes to bump its gold reserves to 25 million plus ounces, however, it will need to focus on area exploration. In that regard, the company plans to spend about $14 million on drilling this year.
Its most promising target to date is likely the Block A property held in a 50-50 joint venture with Trade Winds Ventures Inc. (TSX: V.TWD, Stock Forum), an area in which Detour Gold had budgeted $3 million for 2011 alone.
The Block A property lies immediately west of the proposed pit along the same Sunday Lake volcanic-sediment contact that hosts Detour Lake. A recent resource calculation for Block A outlined an open pit amenable, indicated resource of 1.9 million ounces gold and an inferred resource of 762,000 ounces, based on a gold price of US$1,000 per ounce and using a 0.4 gram cut off.
“What they (Detour Gold) are showing in their current drilling is that mineralization (from their main deposit) extends directly to the west and most likely comes across onto Block A on the southern portion of it,” Trade Winds Ventures CEO and President Ian Lambert told Stockhouse.
Just another confirmation of huge gold deposits in our area.
I just found Detour Lake - 5 min later - It is quite a ways North of Timmins Ontario not Timmons Lake.
I just looked at the map, and it lools like Mineral Mountain is quite a distance from our claims. Platinex and Cresco are in between us and Mineral Mountain. However, we have plenty of our own indications for a lot of gold.
Burk, I don't know if I ever thanked you for getting me into MMTE via the SRSR board.
I agree fully with you evaluation of both of these companies and your feelings about charts for pinkies.
ILELV, I agree. The CEO once said on CNBC that TECK was one of his most successful investments.
I have always thought they were a very likely partner.
It definitely can involve a judge. It all depends on what the parties agreed to and the size of the dispute.
I was involved in one that cost us a million in attorney's fees and we won.
That is exactly what I got, and it makes no sense, because I was trading due to the BS they put out.
Delay tactic, I guess. I am not sure it is worth pursuing.
I just received a written response on my submission of claims for the HEB settlement. They rejected all of mine even though, I thought they were clearly within the time frame specified for a valid claim.
The way it was worded, I suspect everybody received the same denial since it said these claims would be resubmitted to another court.
Please let me know if anyone else received the same responses?
Check your emails for info from Merle on the new Canadian Niobium coins.
This will bring a lot more attention to Niobium and maybe SRSR.
Me too, but I have my eyes on a VERY nice lake home and sailboat.
The uneducated are the people, who have bet their entire future on one Pinkie..
I love SRSR also, but just think about all of the poor fools, who are betting the Farm on this one equity.
Is Someone Manipulating The Story About Rare Earths Under The Pacific Ocean?
by Gareth Hatch on July 4, 2011 · 8 comments
in News Analysis,Rare Earths
Print
There were a number of reports over the weekend, about a group of Japanese researchers who say that they have found significant quantities of rare-earth elements (REEs) at multiple sites on the seabed of the Pacific Ocean. In a paper published in Nature Geoscience on July 3, 2011, lead author Yasushiro Kato and his colleagues shared the extensive work that was undertaken, to obtain and to analyze 2,037 samples from 78 different sites across the Pacific Ocean.
Reuters, the BBC, Nikkei and others reported that there is an estimated 100 billion tonnes of rare earths in these deposits. Which is rather interesting, because the scientists themselves made no such claim in their paper…
What they do report, are two regions of the sea bed with so-called REE-rich muds:
¦one in the eastern South Pacific containing 0.1-0.22% total REEs (including 0.02-0.04% heavy REEs), in layers 10 to 40 meters thick;
¦one in the central North Pacific, containing 0.04-0.1% total REEs (including 0.007-0.02% heavy REEs), in layers 30 to greater than 70 meters thick.
The authors compare these muds to the ion-absorption-type clays found in China, which are presently the world’s primary source of heavy REEs. They comment that the mud in the eastern South Pacific has heavy REE content that is “nearly twice as abundant as in the Chinese deposits“. Of course, those Chinese deposits are not sitting under “great water depths (mostly 4,000-5,000 meters)” and below the surface of the sea floor. It is because they are readily accessible and processable, that the Chinese ion-absorption deposits are exploited, despite their very low concentrations of REEs (heavy or otherwise).
Doing a couple of rough calculations, the authors estimate that a 10 meter-thick bed of mud in the eastern South Pacific, with an area of 1 square kilometer, could yield approximately 9,000 tonnes of rare earths. They also estimate that a 70 meter-thick bed of mud in the central North Pacific, with an area of 1 square kilometer, could yield approximately 25,000 tonnes of rare earths. These numbers are not too shabby (if we again forget about the 2.5-3 miles of water sat above them, and their remote location from any significant land masses). As I’ve said elsewhere, I can’t see these deposits ever being commercially exploited, but the empirical work done by the Japanese researchers which is presented in this paper, is impressive.
What the authors do NOT estimate, is a size of the total mineral resource, and wisely so. While they mention that the thick distributions of mud at numerous sites might mean that the REEs on the sea floor “could exceed the world’s current land reserves of [110 million tonnes]“, they acknowledge the considerable challenges and significant variability present on the seafloor, and thus state that “resource estimates for large regions cannot be made until more detailed data are available for areas lacking cores.”
Perhaps the lead author later just threw out a wild-ass, ridiculous guess at the size of the deposits, in response to a reporter’s question. But if he did not, and if the scientists themselves are not making the claim
Right on DMBAO, any technical moves are purely accidental for the time being.
You are welcome.
I believe we are all very fortunate to know of MMTE.