Settle down me son, MSX is being looked at BIG TIME by regulators, they must play by the rules, obviously they cannot say anything until court matters are taken care of in Chile.
I am sure MSX is very careful on how they put news out there, or risk a shutdown by regulators, remember, the same regulators that are the friends of ABX, so there you go....stay tuned for more news
yourkidinright ... for the moment let us give JL the possibility that he MAY have 'title' to some land in the area that he has described ... let us 'give' him that leeway for the moment... having done so, the real questions are still to be clarified:
What 'rights' do such possible and proported 'titles' give him in the area? Do such 'titles and rights' prohibit Barrick from developing and mining the Pascua Lama deposit and thus, the Mina Pascua deposit? What 'value' in relation to the 'mineral rights' does his proported 'titles and rights' have? What 'value' does this give to MSX IF they constitute the option for 50% of such 'rights'?
To your other point of: "For Brent and directors to hand over 2.5 million without clear title OR a RESONABLE expectation that they could recover it if this all fell apart is negligence at best and very possibly criminal if this should fall apart and they are unable to recover it.. "
Is it common practice, or would be practical 'good business practice' to have placed such an amount in something like a 'trust' based on the criteria spelled out in the agreement / criteria for the 'option to purchase'in your experience?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
