InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 142
Posts 5891
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/27/2003

Re: Zhenli post# 79354

Thursday, 04/12/2018 8:50:11 PM

Thursday, April 12, 2018 8:50:11 PM

Post# of 80983

What I would like to ask, since the Alto consisted of over 10,500 hectares of mining claims, and since Auryn sold the Alto to Cerro for 6,650,000,000 common shares of Cerro, and since the assets have now been significantly diminished, should Auryn be required to return some of the Cerro shares back to their treasury?

No. By your "logic", if Auryn adds properties to its asset base, shouldn't Cerro then be required to contribute more of its shares? Shareholders have to stop viewing the companies as separate entities. I know that's difficult for some to accept or understand until the shares are finally consolidated, but for all intents and purposes, Auryn and Cerro are the same company.

Regardless, continuing to view them as separate entities provides an incorrect perspective of how the company now operates. Perhaps the company (as a whole, not Auryn as a separate operational unit) viewed the other claims as not worth paying taxes for simply as a business decision, not through negligence which some people seem to want to believe.