Home > Boards > US Listed > Mining/Resources > DNI Metals Inc. (DMNKF)

One of us will be vindicated Checkmate

Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last ReadPost New MsgReplies (2) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
saprolities Member Profile
Followed By 0
Posts 28
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/04/18
160x600 placeholder
saprolities   Tuesday, 04/03/18 07:18:10 AM
Re: checkmate28 post# 600
Post # of 639 
One of us will be vindicated Checkmate
Either your character or mine will be exposed as time goes on checkmate. If what I have stated is not true surely you or the company could easily disprove it, but you don’t. You just demonise any fact based opinion that doesn’t align with yours or the company’s official position. As a reminder, the very first Miningwatch article was released on the 12th Sept 2017 and it reported on events that occurred in July 2017. That was prior to the release of the first drill results in fact it was a couple of days after DNI announced a financing agreement. CGM had only been drilling for two and a half months at that point in time and you are suggesting CGM initiated that article? That’s nonsensical. In respect to ‘hurting’ DNI, that is not my intention. Don’t forget, DNI terminated the agreement with CGM and it was that decision that has greatly hurt both companies. In respect to the actions of Randal, I do believe he acted in the best interests of his Shareholders. If unhindered, one drilling rig and one driller were sufficient to complete the job in the given time. Therein lays the issue. They were hindered in their operations, and DNI accepted that to a point by allowing the initial extensions. A CEO can monitor progress remotely and doesn’t need to be onsite to oversee proceedings. Randal has stuck his neck out on Stockhouse to present CGM’s side of the story and when you do that someone is bound to want to chop your head off and that’s exactly what happened every time he posted. That’s fair and to be expected. What’s not fair is precisely what you said I’m doing by “only telling one side of the story”. I’d say it’s your character on the line rather than mine. You’ve changed your stance on the permit from being issued to “it’s in transformation”. You denied, dismissed and even laughed at any suggestion of local disputes yet in total contradiction you now admit you knew of the Court of Appeal process that’s occurring between DNI and the Land holders. I’m very comfortable for this to go to Arbitration. It’s clear to me that CGM has the upper hand with all the necessary supportive evidence. My preference though would be an early settlement as that would allow both companies to move forward. I’ll watch for now for updates on the;

• 2,320 metric ton graphite delivery to the USA that was due in Dec 2017.
• (“EIE” & “CSR”) Environmental impact and social responsibility studies and obligations.
• Commissioning of DNI’s processing plant
• Results from the 28 ton bulk sample delivered to India in January 2018.

Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last ReadPost New MsgReplies (2) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
Follow Board Follow Board Keyboard Shortcuts Report TOS Violation
Current Price
Detailed Quote - Discussion Board
Intraday Chart
+/- to Watchlist