Share
150 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1
clock Created with Sketch. 13/11/17
21:53
Share
Originally posted by Nowhere Man
↑
I note a whole lot of back-slapping self-congratulation and uncritical adulation of the BNR Board round here.Shareholder Update sent out a couple of days ago in response to the BNR September 2017 Quarterly .GEM submitted a valid mining proposal to the Department on 26 August 2016 (Mining Proposal). The Mining Proposal was accepted by the Department and GEM has been working with the Department since then to seek and obtain all approvals required to commence mining on the Geko Gold Tenements. To date GEM has applied for and obtained: a. clearing permits for the open pit mining operations and haul road; GEM is awaiting final approval from the Department of Water for the abstraction and disposal of ground water contained within the pit perimeter. GEM expects that final mine approval will follow shortly after Department of Water approval is obtained. GEM has also completed significant other work in relation to the Geko Gold project, including commissioning a detailed independent bankable feasibility study in relation to the project. Update :GEM and its lawyers intend to vigorously defend Geko's claim. Your directors remain firmly of the view that the Mining Proposal complied in all respects with the requirements of the Tenement Sale Agreement. Your directors consider that Geko's claim is an opportunistic attempt by Bulletin to seek to acquire the Geko Gold project for itself (through Geko), without paying for it. However, your directors consider that Geko's claim has no merit and will respond accordingly. Separately to Geko's claim, Geko was required to pay GEM $60,000 pursuant to the Tenement Sale Agreement. GEM lodged a formal demand for payment of that amount with Geko but Geko has not yet paid the amount. GEM has therefore formally terminated the Tenement Sale Agreement (noting that the Geko Gold Tenements are now registered in GEM's name), but GEM intends to continue to pursue Geko for the outstanding amount.
Expand
I am not sure who you are but if you are a sharholder of GEM you must be pretty happy. You should have a look at the resolutions for the AGM today. You are talking about the efforts to build a real project....that´s the intention of GEM? Why do they want to pay for non-executive Directors the crazy amount of up to $400.000 a year?? I don´t know any junior company that pays such a high salary for a non-ex director! Maybe they see that they have no chance to get the project into production and probably will lose it soon. So what´s the best to take out the little money left as salaries?
