Replies to post #91146 on Fortress Financial Group fka FFGO

[briantek]

Viv I know they will delete for off topic but... you keep a smile on your face and we will await your return... briantek

[ThurstonHowellThe3rd]

hey Vianna - all the best to you on a speedy recovery.
take care,
Thurston

[cmistocks]

Hey V, This is for you! Deus o abençoa meu amiga, obrigado por sua amizade!!

May the Lord bless you and keep you, may He lay his hands upon the surgeons hands, may His face shine down upon you wherever you are, bring countenance to you and give you peace in your time of trouble...

[redsboy]

Vi, if it's any comfort to you, please know there are a lot of folks out here not only THINKING of you, but praying for you. You probably have NO idea of how much you mean to many of us. Please, let us know as soon as possible, and in the meantime, good luck and God speed, girl.

[JPD3]

The following paragraph from the recent company correspondence seems odd:

"...It is a fairly complex Offer and the Company's acceptance of this Offer is wholly dependent upon the unconditional consent of certain significant other stockholders in both the "Bouse" and "South Copperstone" Gold Properties..."

Now, reading this...I wonder why the offer is wholly dependent upon unconditional consent of certain significant other stockholders in both the 'B' and 'SC' gold properties? Now, why would 'certain significant other stockholders' need to be consulted? Why wouldn't the bidder just deal directly with these holders and leave ffgo out of it??? PERHAPS the offer is complex becuase it is conditional, in the sense that the bidder does not want to buy ffgo's portion and still have to deal with the remaining historic holders that may or may not budge the way the bidder wants them to??? Doing it seperately certainly leaves the posibility of the bidder 'commiting' by 1st buying ffgo's claims and then the other holder bacually demand alot more...and if the bidder already has bought ffgo's portion, then that would make him/her quite vulnerable now wouldnt it??? Anyone ever play monopoly while having two of the 3 pieces and needing that THIRD PIECE?? Call me crazy, but it sure does Sound like REAL negotiation tactics to me!! WELL, a good way to solve the aforesaid scenario, if true, would be to put a 'condition' that the bid is effective 'if' and 'only if' ffgo can get the 'majority' historic holders on board FIRST! THAT WAY the 'bidder' would essentially take 100% ownership in one single swipe...no?!! Just food for thought while we wait....(suppose we will find out everything soon enough anyways..but it's always much funner to guess in advance isn't it:)

-PD