InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 2467
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/11/2011

Re: gharma post# 10131

Wednesday, 04/17/2013 7:39:35 AM

Wednesday, April 17, 2013 7:39:35 AM

Post# of 12573

malfeasance in practice



The above treminology used in your post may be overly strong in this case but I agree that something like that which you suggest may have occurred. By that, I mean wrong calculations being used. The question is by whom - the former writers or the current writers?

Conversely, I also wonder if CD was deliberately lead into swithcing writers so as to benefit any potential TPW buyers. Perhaps any potential buyer knows that the new agency would use this different approach and since a potential suitor would benefit from that approach, naturally that agency is the one they recommend. I'm not saying that is the case, but either one is a possibility.

Are both approaches acceptable in the regulator's eyes and do the regulators even have such a stipulation are other question that I would be inclined to ask. Nevertheless, I think that it is safe to say - the damage is done.

Some will blame Chris for this while others will see that the gold is there and the model has been proven over and over again.

I will say this. The words "we are pleased" in this news release were highly inappropriate and I tire or reading them from any and all mining companies on each and every news release.

Join InvestorsHub

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.