Originally posted by rusty388
No he wasn't. Read it again... it's very clever wording.
Does it say a number of offers just for offtake? NOPE! It's a play on words like they do very very regularly.
A number of offers under consideration... and then they mentioned three separate things. You can't factually say they have multiple offers from offtake partners. It does not say that. Wake up to the games already.
Stop playing with semantics and assumptions. It is cleverly worded because that's what business does.
Most posters would be aware of the vexatious games at play, unfortunately, its not clever and the games are certainly not from the company! It's only fair that In the same way GEO_AU interprets it as multiple, others may also interpret it differently. IMO when you are in negotiation you NEVER mention who or what may be interested, I call that clever business.
As far as Isabel is concerned IMO, we may have a 30 day wait when a problem has arisen between negotiating parties, so post Christmas would provide any progress, before that we may have leaks from those that may not be happy with the current deal, all IMO and based on the SI mining process and LOI that requires a reasonable level of agreement.
GLTA Holders
Today’s news
