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.
>>Today GBGLF is trading normally.
Notice the order says direct and indirect - that indirect is a reference to the foreign ordinaries that trade down here. They'll have to forward the order to SEC/DTC for processing - how long will that take? You'll know when the music stops. :)
Your stocks trades at a third of a penny....it's in receivership after getting booted out of CCAA for not having enough $$$ to justify the expense of an orderly liquidation of the several hundred million dollars in debt that remains unsatisfied.....and you want a link.
>>Should I wait for news of lions being herded next at the Burnstone?
You're a master of willing suspension of disbelief Nagoya1 - a zen master.
>>Yet another company that thinks GBG still owns at least part of the Hollister Mine?
FYI: "There's a sucker born every minute" is a phrase often credited to P. T. Barnum (1810–1891), an American showman. Though this phrase is often credited to Barnum, it was more likely spoken by a man by the name of David Hannum, who was criticizing both Barnum and his customers.
>>This management adjustment will be a huge benefit for the company.
Wow, I can't say I've ever heard someone call the appointment of an insolvency receiver a 'management adjustment'. lulz
The 800,000,000 is due for an impairment charge of 799,999,990.
>>If Hollister gets the 90M from the 15% net profits, that would be worth around .16 per share....
The full 90 mm is worth zero per share as creditors get first dibs and they are owed a few hundred million....that's the part you don't seem to grasp.
>>PS Remember, Ron Thiessen our GBG Chairman
For the 40th time, Ron - and ALL the others - resigned months ago.
>>So we have to be very careful and protect the Burnstone Mine at all cost. It must stay as Great Basin Gold Ltd. property.
It is very valuable....so valuable in fact that when it was put on the auction block and anyone in the world could bid...it went for 10 bucks. You guys can be pretty dense sometimes.
>>The problem is that we have to pay to KPMG 1.5M and that would left U$S 250.000 in cash by the end of this month.
No cuts. You forgot about a few hundred million in unpaid creditor claims that are in line for that 1.75 mil.....oops.
>>and yet look at the PPS, let me spell it, SOMETHING.
Thanks again for your contribution. GBGLF
You're kidding right? Your proof of value is that the company trades for .003. You realize there is a difference between the company being worthless and the shares being worthless - the latter always tends to lag the former - usually because of people like yourself. Carry on - buy more.
It's hard to provide links to nothing....how about you provide a link that suggests a JV with Waterton is even a .0001% possibility....for a company with no officers, no directors, hundreds of million of remaining debt with all the assets sold. TIA
It's just like the secret JV with Waterton and the secret deal on Burnstone - the secret retained Tanzanian holdings - just think how many other secret assets may be part of this huge conspiracy....the sky is the limit for sure.
>>The Burnstone mine is GBGLF property like it or not...
GBGLF property pending Wits closing the SouthGold deal.....a crappy deal but still the best deal GBGLF creditors could find. And I'm not wasting my time - I'm doing research on how gullible folks can be - it's fascinating.
>>LOL! Yes the telephone bill is what will kill this company! :D
You're killing me Damnsammit
>>300 shares drops the price 33% I don't understand that.
Do you understand that there are two prices? A bid price and an ask price.
>>And there is no intent to sell the mine in that conditions.
I'd suggest to you that that is not true.
>>I asked regarding Burnstone Mine and she told me that the asset is 100% Great Basin Gold Ltd. property and there were no intention to sell it by now.
You might want to call her back and ask for a little more clarity on that "no intention to sell it":
http://www.miningweekly.com/article/sa-competition-body-approves-wits-golds-burnstone-deal-2013-08-28
And where to you get this market makers holding 80 million shares #? I'm sure I'm going to enjoy this answer.
>>The Market Makers of GBGLF still have 80.000.000 Shares.
Ooh, watch the language, there could be chirruns reading these posts. To answer your question, no I don't have any shares in this pig...and the market makers buy and sell shares to make a market, that's what they do.
I would suggest you direct your question to the GBG receiver if you want a real answer to that question (it won't be a pretty answer)
http://cfcanada.fticonsulting.com/GBGL/
>>Do you REALLY think Veris Gold would post the name Great Basin Gold beside the Hollister Mine by error on this August 2013 Veris Gold presentation?
Yes, oversight explains it. The alternative scenario, the one you are proposing - is that all the court documents relating to the sale of Hollister to Waterton are elaborate fabrications that only you and Veris Gold have figured out.
>>and Shanta still hasn't updated their webpage yet the link that you posted is from Feb 5th, 2013.
It's from Feb 2013 because that is how long ago GBG liquidated it's Shanta related assets. You can cross reference the transactions with court documents from the CCAA proceedings here:
http://www.kpmg.com/ca/en/services/advisory/transactionrestructuring/creditorlinksites/great-basin-gold/pages/default.aspx
....or you can keep looking at obviously outdated company websites and scratching your head at how sloppy most of the companies are at communicating with their shareholders....most really only care about shareholders when the time for private placements rolls around.
You may as well inquire over at Red Kite while you are at it ;)
http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/yorkshire/red-kite-takes-stake-in-shanta-gold.html
>>I still think think he is in control of this GBG financial fiasco?
yeah.....I don't think so.
http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/great-basin-gold-limited-announces-appointment-receiver-concurrent-resignation-all-directors-1807214.htm
>>But, if you are trying to keep the price down, a $1.00 will do it.
That there is no depth to the bid and the bid price retreats when smacked with small amounts of dollars is a big problem for you guys....as I'm sure you've realized.
>>3 million GBGLF shares traded before NOON and the ask is only .0031 ? Hmmm?
$9,000 doesn't do what it used to.
You finally found the smoking gun GPB. I'm going all in now.
>>So if the CCAA had no jurisdiction over GBG Inc., Antler, and most importantly Rodeo...
Then who did? You know that as well as the rest - these subs filed Chapter 11 in the US, and Chapter 11 was used to auction Hollister which is long gone no matter how many times you insinuate it isn't.
>>The Shanta joint venture with Great Basin Gold in Chunya district adds another c2,500 km2.
Choosing to ignore that this too is gone eh?
Lol, probably. Although almost everyone here seems to abhor my posts, I did speak with Rick Rule in Vancouver back in May about Burnstone. He was very familiar with the mine as Sprott Resource had gotten stuck with a huge pile of the notes when they bought Flatiron in '12. His personal opinion was that he wouldn't take Burnstone if you gave him 20 million - he felt the geological issues were extremely significant.
>>Doesn't GBG own the Southgold shares? If so, how much are they worth. Is this where GBG shareholders regain their value. Who knows?
They sold the shares to Witz for 10 bucks:
the entire issued share capital of Southgold ("Sale Shares"), the sole owner of the Burnstone property located in the South Rand area of the Witwatersrand Goldfields in the Mpumalanga Province, South Africa where the Burnstone mine project is located;
all shareholder loans and all GBG's inter-group loans against Southgold (the "Sale Claims"),
Why $10 bucks? I guess because GBGLF had no cash to throw in as boot. Rick Rule said you've have to pay him 20 million to take it, and he was very familiar with the mine as he inherited a large position in the GbG notes when Sprott bought out FlatIron in '12. Mine was geological junk....that's why they got 10 bucks and not a penny more.
Nagoya - if GBGLF doesn't cease trading prior to late December - you'll see all the volume you've been wondering about.....
Dein Kommentar ist reich an Ironie.
Just wanted to clarify for the benefit of everyone on the board why the question was asked.
>>All in 2; what the Questionare wanted to know is if you bought shares on or after 7/15/2013, not before
The Trustee was looking to distinguish between vulture investors, like myself, who get involved after the filing, and those who have been long term holders. When it comes to filling seats on an EC, Trustee will usually look first to long time holders, all else equal.
>>not based on valuations, but something personal out of the UST's office. It's either that or the lawyers absolutely made some stuff up out of thin air (which happens all too often) and hoodwinked someone at the UST's office.
Couldn't disagree more - this was from my perspective a textbook example of a case where the US Trustee should appoint an EC, and that is just exactly what happened. AgFeed is 1) not hopelessly insolvent and 2) Mgmt is not necessarily looking out for the interests of equity (and I would say not having filed financials in two years satisfies that threshold)
Trump Casinos?
Trump Casinos?