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.
No financing, no mine, until this case is closed. Drop it on Ameca as late as possible to drag it as long as possible.
Lawyer will look at it free . If there is a case ,it is a big 35 percent. Ameca wouldn't be able to get financing . Who is zooming who.
Lawyer will look at it free . If there is a case ,it is a big 35 percent. Ameca wouldn't be able to get financing . Who is zooming who.
If STHC RM collapses it is fine. If it RM into something else besides Ameca ,(Schatzi or anything else for example,) Mark would be liable to shareholders purchasing between AUG./20 and Jan./21 . This why I believe it has all collapsed . On the grounds of deceipt and materiality as it applies to safe harbor. I am not a lawyer but on some minimal DD that is how I understand why things have developed as they have.
Ameca ? NI report ? Do people still think that has anything to do with STHC anymore .
Hope is that it(Schatzi) can develop into something like First Quantum...exploration, mine development and eventually having its own mines. Sri Lankans probably gave him no choice . He probably had to accomodate them as best he could without being booted out of the Ameca graphite project himself. IMOHO
What it indicates currently isthat Schatzi will provide services as described . For Ameca or anyone else that wants to contract them for their services. The business relationship is complete once they are paid for such services. That is it , no piece of mineral resources ,no royalty, nothing else.
I am holding my shares as well for now. We are going on a different ride, that's all.
Mergers fall apart yes. This didn't . He chose to not merge with Ameca just as he chose to say it would be with Ameca. Evasion purposes.
Ameca could have been advised to go ahead and screw STHC shareholders and if nobody complains(legally), Ameca and its future investors would be saved much dilution and would be easier to raise capital. If STHC shareholders that purchased between Aug. 2020 and the present raise an issue. Ameca is where they started anyway. Ameca was self described as a junior mining company reverse merging with STHC until last week. The delays were possibly because they had to figure out how to screw STHC shareholders. The ones they would have to worry about are the ones that purchased in the past 10 months. They are no doubt being pressured by the private investors and perhaps clauses in conditions from the Asian Development Bank aside from the kickbacks that have to be paid. They want to be listed in North America. Shareholders have rights and should be explored. The legal troubles could be very problematic for them moving forward if there is a case here. My opinion based on what I have seen as of late.
People on the board can say whatever they want. I don't think Mark B can. Releases and latest PR's and articles are cleverly worded to circumvent what was previously released. Evasion , deception, altering material information for these purposes. There are protections for shareholders even on the OTC.
Chemist ? are you employed by Schatzi or Ameca ? It seems your posts are not that of a shareholder that has just been delivered news that completely changes the outlook of an investment you had made. Your advice would seem similar to the legal advice STHC shareholders would receive from Ameca attorneys.
Welcome to Ameca . "A Junior Mining Company"
Microcap Daily describing Ameca Mining as an "exploration" company and not a Mining Company. Getting the picture ? Did the original Ameca Mining site describe itself as such ?
Have to wait and see how it plays out. Everything released is subject to change. It would be a big 35% .We may get an invitation to join a suit posted at some point.
How does that reconcile with shareholders that purchased shares between Aug. 2020 and the present the fact that Mark posted in Aug 2020 that RM with Ameca Mining was in motion. Tough luck for shareholders or not so fast. ? There are some protections for shareholders . It appears material information was possibly deceitful. Change of plans to harm shareholders in favor of private investors.
Schatzi will be a seperate entity " hired "( not partnered with) by Ameca Group or anyone else that wants to hire them for their sevices for exploration and permit work. IMHO . What is Schatzi worth now .Evasive maneuver to keep STHC shareholders away from any of the minerals. Probably a condition of the private investors that will finance the mine to minimize their dilution. Aug/20 post clearly stated STHC will RM with Ameca mining. Anyone that purchased shares between that date and this week may have a claim . Evasion and misleading statements do not protect a company from Safe harbor.
Safe harbor is not carte blanche. Certain conditions must be met. May and I repeat may have violated two clauses in the Safe Harbor act. Deceipt and Reliance , as well as Materiality.
Aug/20 , He clearly stated RM with Ameca Mining. He drops STHC or he is in some hot water.