News Focus
News Focus
icon url

MabweKingPin

09/10/13 4:08 PM

#2575 RE: pitboss22 #2565

It is documented that Baker Hughes has agreed to pay $150.00 and above for present and future barite. It is a fact that Baker Hughes has a Master Service Agreement with MBMI.

It is a fact that Baker Hughes has an excellent relationship with their partner and therefore it would be
out of character with this agreement and in particularl, the understanding that latitude on schedule,
size, and other areas is naturally a part of reasonability. This is by all standards an obvious, and professional courtesy . In this case it would be patently ridiculous for Baker Hughes who has been there every step of the way , not to mention the offering of their client Steinbock Minerals Switzerland
to participate with this venture, TO SUDDENLY BAIL BECAUSE THERE WERE 5 GALLONS SHORT of the 225,000 tons.

icon url

kjb76

09/10/13 4:14 PM

#2576 RE: pitboss22 #2565

pittboss you said:

"But I agree about the company posting the report and any others. Like you said, why not post it?

The only reason for not posting it is to hide something from investors."

Can you give me facts regarding the normalcy of PUBLIC posting of survey reports for new mines that are active?

MAYBE, to stockholders---just a guess, but I doubt it, certainly not in a venue of those that may not be stakeholders!

Sometimes things requested are just so absurd they sound feasible!!!