news?, page-22

Ikazo..........the manganese is there, depending on the economics it most likely would be profitable. There would be operational risk. There would be financing risk. There are, at this very moment, regulatory risks, prompted by competitive risk, environmental activist risk etc etc etc.

My point is, that when the negotiations begin, the government's position has to be to limit the damages that it will pay. IF i were the lawyers for the government I would press the "uncertainty" of mining adventures as the mitigating factor and apply that uncertainty to govern the amount of comp I would pay.

If I were the lawyers for the parties, I would argue the "knowns" of mining in the Groote area, but the "unknown" is the undersea adventure.................

I invested in NTM because of the quality of the find as an extension to existing veins. Clearly, some of the risks we are experiencing have overtaken us. A government has many ways to show it is open for business without payout a comp that replaces the potential market cap of an uncertain venture. One way I suggest is for the government to reverse its decision. Absent that? ?????????????????