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.
It really does not matter what the bas**rs think of DGRI or any other gold stock. Other that death and taxes one thing is for sure and that is that the value of the dollar will continue to dwindle thanks to our current administration and the outrageous spending. So whether you invest in gold bullion or gold stock you cannot go wrong and DGRI is the best gold stock to invest in. There is something to be said about a company that is concerned with lowering it's debt ratio and increasing it's holdings. Does nothing but add value for it's investors!
Your welcome, good point you made.
$400.00 in 2004 and $900.00 in 2006
Nodummy, everyone of your post makes me buy more. Thank you and have a very Merry Christmas.
OTC Market Wire: - News Alert - (OTCBB: AGDI): Aultra Gold, Inc. has executed a definitive securities exchange agreement to acqu
Posted on: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 03:37:22 EST
Symbols: AGDI, AGDIE
Dec 24, 2010 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) --
Aultra Gold, Inc. has executed a definitive securities exchange agreement to acquire a concession of a gold and ruby exploration license in Cambodia.
Aultra Gold, Inc. (OTC BB:AGDI.ob - News), operating internationally as Shamika2Gold ("Shamika"), has executed a definitive securities exchange agreement to acquire a concession of a gold and ruby exploration license in Cambodia. The area covered in the license is comprised of approximately 158 square miles in the Samlaut district adjacent to the famous Pailin ruby gem area. A Phase 1 & 2 Survey Report on the project was prepared by Terra Insight Services, Inc., a subsidiary of Terra Energy & Resource Technologies, Inc. (TEGR.OB), suggesting potential resources of 1.5 million ounces of gold and 9,000 kilograms of rubies.
Upon consummation of the exchange, Shamika will acquire approximately 85% of the capital stock from the Mauritius holding company which, upon formation and contribution, will hold these mining rights in exchange for 57,000,000 shares of Shamika common stock and shares of Series B Performing Preferred Stock, entitling the holder to 45% of the net operating profit from the mining project. The closing is conditioned upon the formation of the holding company and subsequent contribution of the mining rights.
"This is a very important acquisition for Shamika and confirms the company's strategy to acquire and develop international gold assets ready or close to production," stated Robert Vivian, President and Chief Executive Officer.
About AGDI: Aultra Gold Inc., which operates as Shamika2Gold, is an international junior gold company with strategic holdings in the Kilo Moto Greenbelt in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where major mining companies have begun exploration and development. Over $300 million of exploration, development and production capital has been allocated to the Kilo Moto Greenbelt in the last three years. The company's strategy is to become a global exploration and production company.
Forward-Looking Statements:
The information contained herein includes forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or future financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Undue reliance should not be placed on forward-looking statements since they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond our control and which could, and likely will, materially affect actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Any forward-looking statement reflect our current views with respect to future events and is subject to these and other risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to our operations, results of operations, growth strategy and liquidity. We assume no obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, or to update the reasons actual results differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future. The safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 protects companies from liability for their forward- looking statements if they comply with the requirements of the Act.
Exactlly, so if you include those shares and take out the a/s and the o/s, Dgri is worth well over $15.00 per share at the current market value.
Don't know what you are smoking but there is no way gold is going to "free fall". So are you saying the value of the dollar is going to increase? Maybe you did not see the news this morning but unemployment claims increased by 400,000 last month, what does that tell you?
Even Better, I did not see that.
From the last PR they stated that they controlled resources of 7.5 million ounces of gold. Lets say that is would cost $850.00 per ounce to mine, at todays prices that would be a profit of $510.00 per ounce times 7.5 million is 3,825,000,000. Now lets divide that by all shares listed of 792,228,017 which is the o/s, a/s and the float. The total is $4.83 per share and I am not even including the controlling interest in Aultra Gold or the 4,950,000 million shares of Shamika.
Now anyone else think that DGRI is undervalued???
That was a sell not a buy
Guys going to sign out now and spend time with family for the holidays. Hope you all have a Merry Christmas and safe holiday season. It has been a great year for LLEG and looking forward to 2011.
You need PDF conversion software. Do you have any?
Thought I would remind everyone why we are here and why DGRI is so undervalued!
What a crock of SH*T. T trades do not equal a red flag!!
This is interesting.
Penny Stock Fever Initiates Coverage on Dutch Gold Resources, Inc. (DGRI)
Wednesday December 22, 2010 - 03:00 AM EST
EmailWire.Com Press Releases
Share:
Bookmark and Share
Rating:
Text Size:
(EMAILWIRE.COM, December 22, 2010 ) Minneapolis, MN - Dutch Gold Resources, Inc. (Other OTC:DGRI.PK) has been having MEGA volume as of late, but yesterday (DGRI) frll 20%.
Yesterday (DGRI) had volume of just over 41 million and closed down 20% at .0216
Please visit us at http://www.pennystockfever.com and sign up for our FREE email alerts (stock picks). Our last alert (RFMK) went up 268% in just one day.
Dutch Gold Resources, Inc. (DGRI) has a 52 week low of .01 cent and a 52 week high of .28 cents.
Penny Stock Fever truly likes (DGRI), but we suggest letting it dip to under .02 cents before buying.
(DGRI) actually owns and leases some very good gold producing land, so if they can uncover the shiny stuff, they're GOLDEN!
Penny Stock Fever believes that (DGRI) could see .10 cents in 2011.[color=red][/color]
Okay I understand that, My point being why would those 3 members vote yes as part of the the SEC why would they vote no as part of the PUC?
Dumping is over, there are more buys coming in than sells.
I understand that but the SEC is made up of 3 members of the PUC. Why would the SEC give approval with the 3 members of the PUC. Do those 3 members that gave approval not have voting power when it goes to the PUC?
I have a question and will reference back to post 82437 where it says that the site evaluation committee consist of 3 members from the PUC. Why would they give them the contract if the PUC would not approve what the site evaluation committee has already approved. Are these 3 members from the PUC that were on the site evaluation committee not voting members of the PUC?
Spence are they still doing clean-up work at the site?
It will go the the Grey's. They will have to find a MM to re list the stock on the pinks, but before that happens they need to prove that what was listed in the PR's is true and accurate before the MM sticks his neck out to re list. If you don's believe me check out what happened to ACLH. Still on the Grey's after 5 months even when the company said that they were going to re open on the pinks.
Amen to that. I am getting tired of all the be to. Let the company do its job. Most of the posters putting this information out have not been here for a long time
I cannot beleive that you guys keep posting information that is not officially out yet. Look what you are doing to the PPS. Who are the true stakeholders here? Really makes one wonder!
What time is the news expected?
Spence. Did you hear the broadcast? If so could you share?
Spence, what is the overall sentiment from the citizens of Berlin? Are they for the project because it will create jobs and help the economy or concerned about possible higher utility bills?
I think we will see 7's before the end of the year. Possibly .0063 to .0065 today. All IMO
How much did you loose on "santa's pick" yesterday TEFFY?
Good morning Spence and let me say welcome back from restriction. I am looking forward to an educated, informative and of course "unbiased" information exchange with you.
Okay Dem, what is the pick?
Could not agree more. Needless to say I am a little disappointed in some of the longs that I have seen on this board for a long time. I have posted 2 post (with links) right when the discussions started about this subject to show that there was nothing to worry about and yet you guys continued with it. IT IS PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT THE PUC HAS NOT ADDRESSED ANY ISSUES PAST 2025 WHICH MEANS NOTHING. The unfortunate thing is that the damage has been done and we will continue to go down today. Have any of you noticed that the one person that has intervention status and has bashed this stock to no end has LLEG in his portfolio. Now isn't that interesting? HMMMMMMMM
The company is screwed, sorry guys I invested in ACLH. Same thing, they issued PR's saying that BP was evaluating their products for the oil spill, YEA RIGHT! The SEC suspended them and 15 days later opened on the greys. Now trading at .0001 at about 25 shares a day. Same thing is going to happen here.
If you are talking about Spence I would not put much merit into that. Here is a link to the RSA 362-F and from reading it they only cover items through calendar year 2025. Everyone acts like it is the Mayan calendar since nothing is addressed beyond 2025. Spence has another agenda and I am sure he has an interest in another energy plant and is getting paid to make sure Laidlaw does not get their permit to open. For GODS sake take a look at the man. Does he look like someone that is in the know?
Do you have the link to the order?
Can I ask what started this issue?
According to the PUC the site evaluation committee is made up of 3 members of the PUC. If they did not have the authority to approve the 20 year agreement don't you think they would know that. Here is a list of the departments that compromise the committee and also their powers which state "Determine the terms and conditions of any certificate issued under this chapter." Below is the list of their responsibilities and from what I see they have the power to issue a 20 year contract if they want to.
The Site Evaluation Committee is responsible for issuing certificates to energy facilities such as natural gas pipelines and certain electric generating and transmission facilities. The Committee is also authorized to impose terms and conditions upon such certificates and to monitor the construction and operation of the certificated facilities.
The Site EvaluationCommittee is comprised of the following members:
* The three Public Utilities Commissioners and the Chief Engineer of the Public Utilities Commission, the Chairman of the Public Utilities Commission is the vice-chair.
* The Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Services (or the Assistant Commissioner as designee) chairs the Committee.
* Other Committee members include:
o the Director of the Division of Water;
o the Commissioner of the Department of Resources and Economic Development (or the Director of the Division of Economic Development as designee);
o the Commissioner of the Department of Health and Human Services (or one of the 2 most senior administrators within the Department responsible for management of public health services as designee);
o the Executive Director of the Fish and Game Department;
o the Director of the Division of Parks and Recreation;
o the Director of the Division of Forests and Lands;
o the Director of the Division of Air Resources;
o the Director of the New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning (OEP) (or Deputy Director as designee); and
o the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation (or Assistant Commissioner as designee)
More information about the Site Evaluation Committee can be found at NH RSA Chapter 162-H or by calling the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services at 603-271-3503.
162-H:4 Powers of the Committee. –
I. The committee shall:
(a) Issue any certificate under this chapter for an energy facility.
(b) Determine the terms and conditions of any certificate issued under this chapter.
(c) Monitor the construction and operation of any energy facility granted a certificate under this chapter.
(d) Enforce the terms and conditions of any certificate issued under this chapter.
II. The committee shall hold hearings as required by this chapter and such additional hearings as it deems necessary and appropriate.
III. The committee may delegate the authority to monitor the construction or operation of any energy facility granted a certificate under this chapter to such state agency or official represented on the committee as it deems appropriate, but, subject to RSA 162-H:10, it may not delegate authority to hold hearings, issue certificates, determine the terms and conditions of a certificate, or enforce a certificate. Any authorized representative or delegate of the committee shall have a right of entry onto the premises of any part of the energy facility to ascertain if the facility is being constructed or operated in continuing compliance with the terms and conditions of the certificate. During normal hours of business administration and on the premises of the facility, such a representative or delegate shall also have a right to inspect such records of the certificate-holder as are relevant to the terms or conditions of the certificate.
III-a. The committee may delegate to an agency or official represented on the committee the authority to specify the use of any technique, methodology, practice, or procedure approved by the committee within a certificate issued under this chapter, or the authority to specify minor changes in the route alignment to the extent that such changes are authorized by the certificate for those portions of a proposed electric transmission line or energy transmission pipeline for which information was unavailable due to conditions which could not have been reasonably anticipated prior to the issuance of the certificate.
IV. In cases where the committee determines that other existing statutes provide adequate protection of the objectives of RSA 162-H:1, the committee may, within 60 days of acceptance of the application, or filing of a request for exemption with sufficient information to enable the committee to determine whether the proposal meets the requirements set forth below, and after holding a public informational hearing in a county where the energy facility is proposed, exempt the applicant from the approval and certificate provisions of this chapter, provided that the following requirements are met:
(a) Existing state or federal statutes, state or federal agency rules or municipal ordinances provide adequate protection of the objectives of RSA 162-H:1;
(b) A review of the application or request for exemption reveals that consideration of the proposal by only selected agencies represented on the committee is required and that the objectives of RSA 162-H:1 can be met by those agencies without exercising the provisions of RSA 162-H;
(c) Response to the application or request for exemption from the general public indicates that the objectives of RSA 162-H:1 are met through the individual review processes of the participating agencies; and
(d) All environmental impacts or effects are adequately regulated by other federal, state, or local statutes, rules, or ordinances.
V. Once an energy facility application has been accepted, the chairperson may designate a subcommittee of no fewer than 7 members that shall consider such application. The subcommittee shall include the chairperson or the vice-chairperson of the committee, and at least 3 members selected from among the department of environmental services, the department of resources and economic development, and the fish and game department. With the exception of the chairperson or vice-chairperson, each member of the committee may designate an employee from his or her agency to assume his or her responsibilities as a subcommittee member for the purposes of this paragraph, provided that such designee shall be a senior administrator within the agency, department, or division that the member represents under RSA 162-H:3. The chairperson may designate the assistant commissioner of the department of environmental services to assume his or her responsibilities as a subcommittee member for the purposes of this paragraph. For purposes of statutory interpretation and executing the regulatory functions of this chapter, the subcommittee shall assume the role of and be considered the committee, with all of its associated powers and duties.
Source. 1991, 295:1. 1997, 298:26, eff. June 20, 1997. 2007, 364:5, eff. July 17, 2007. 2008, 348:7, eff. July 7, 2008. 2009, 65:6-8, eff. Aug. 8, 2009
10 LOL try over 500
58% buys and 42% sells today