InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,576.17
(
0.06%
)
US TECH 100
19,900.00
(
0.03%
)
Dow Jones
39,302.67
(
-0.11%
)
Brent Oil
84.43
(
-1.16%
)
Bitcoin
57,792.62
(
1.93%
)
Post# of 114188
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

michael t

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 34
Posts 1797
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/24/2005

michael t

Re: None

Monday, 10/03/2016 1:49:18 PM

Monday, October 03, 2016 1:49:18 PM

Post# of 114188
re:CUO

This may be a more significant development then it appears to be. Without the lease contract and the details of the lawsuit it is difficult to discern how significant this is for the Company.

What we do know is that CUO halted the mining operations at the leased property back in 2014. At that time, they had paid royalties on 17.7m tons of an agreed upon 50m tons total.

The Company has been seeking to rescind the lease. If rescission wasn't granted then is the Company obligated for the royalties on the 32.3m tons that have yet to be mined?

I really wish the Company had provided more clarity as to the potential reserves faced as a result of this ruling.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.

Sign Up