Quality of GEO OTGDD is of Question, imho.
GEO seems proud of its strong on-the-ground evidence as well as its philosophy to provide quick, concise and efficient research instead of the pages and pages of information indicative of most research reports. From GEO's recent articles, mass majority of readers have been given thumb down by as to the quality of works put in despite these articles were consistent with its theme, not long but time & cost effective.
Ignorance or Innocence
GEO denies LLEN’s interest in Ping Yi mine and purposely ignores the following facts:
a)LLEN has taken Effective Control of the mine operation since its acquisition.
b)The Company during the third quarter of 2010 assumed a loan agreement approximately $2,307,870 with bank in China (interest rate 9.7% p.a., maturity on Feb. 26, 2012) to finance part of its acquisition of the Ping Yi mine.
c)In June 2010 the Company completed the construction of and opened the Ping Yi coal washing plant near the Ping Yi mine to wash coal from the Ping Yi mine as well as from third-party mines.
d)During the first two quarters of 2011 mine development, ventilation and electrical system improvements for the PYC mine and building of staff quarters, and construction of a sewage treatment system and road expansion for the washing facility were made.
e)On-site visit including Ping Yi mine and washing facility was also arranged in April last year for investors and analysts.
f)The Acquisition Agreement was not completed as expected in June 2010; however, as of April 30, 2011 there was no outstanding payment for acquisition for Ping Yi mine.
Company Information Search of the SAIC file shows contact addresses of all partners of Ping Yi Mine. GEO appears unconcerned that its DD team may need to contact them to verify the web ads, Mr. Wu’s identity & agency relationship and the most update status of the Acquisition Agreement those partners have with LLEN’s subsidiary (they ALL are the parties to the agreements)
