bootleg, I reckon those 19M shares can be challenged on a couple of fronts, both of which should be very familiar to certain people at AGU. Who is familiar with the CHM case? Anyone read the SOC? Do I need to spell it out? I doubt a similar argument will be used because those who use it also incriminate themselves.
The other argument could be that certain shareholders were disadvantaged by the issue of those 19M if it all went to "you know who".
There is no reason for GPN not to proceed with the drilling while we wait for this outcome. It's AGU's problem and the terms of the JV may be looked at retrospectively or may be renegotiated, who knows....it shouldn't be GPN's problem though IMO. Get cracking.
AGU Price at posting:
1.4¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
