Replies to post #58906 on Medinah Minerals (MDMN)

[Toxic Avenger]

There is. MDMN has a permanent NDA - "Not Disclosing Anything" policy.

They've been great about sticking to it so far.

[Hurricane_Rick]

Which is it? If the sampling was significantly less reliable, why did MDMN dilute 20 million shares to pick it up?

While Jota may not be as potentially lucrative as ADL, it was merely another potential opportunity and it was reported that there were interested parties at the time (no, not the Hoffmans). Larry Regis explained the rationale for moving ahead on Jota, Ciclon and other potential opportunities to JV at the AGM. Feel free to consult the video of the AGM to get his exact words. This was all part of Medinah's plan to evolve from a junior miner into a "capital company", setting up royalty streams from monetizing JJ's properties through joint ventures and/or property sales agreements.

Keep in mind that at the time Medinah was operating under the assumption that the ADL Sales & Purchase Agreement with Amarant was done. As such, the company began moving ahead with other opportunities while also taking care of outstanding corporate issues.

Why not spend that money on proving up the more reliable property?

Because Medinah wasn't in an "either/or" decision point at the time with Jota and ADL. As explained above, ADL was under contract with Amarant. As part of that contract, the responsibility of proving up ADL was Amarant's. The Jota property closed during the time that Amarant was under contract on ADL.

JJ most likely has the report on the Jota claim, how about posting that on the website for all to see.

I wouldn't mind seeing it. However, there are other reports on ADL that I'd rather see first.

Finally, if the potential JV partners for the Jota claim were the Hoffman's, MDMN aught to be ashamed of itself.

Please.

I don't suppose the company will inform us of who they were; let me guess, there is an NDA in place.?

Since when do any mining companies release the names of the parties they are negotiating joint ventures with?

[janice shell]

If the sampling was significantly less reliable, why did MDMN dilute 20 million shares to pick it up? Why not spend that money on proving up the more reliable property?

Probably because 20 million shares of MDMN aren't worth much.