LNY 0.00% 0.6¢ laneway resources ltd

not possible, page-28

  1. 13,065 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 187
    There is no way that I will even try to answer your question with any degree of certainty and I defy anyone else to even try. But, in saying that, for example, the actual owners of the land took 15 years to get approval to operate their coach tours on THEIR land, but, probably covering hundreds of thousands, even millions, of hectares.
    That is a totally different situation to a simple mining project covering just 689 hectares where it has been clearly stated by the person in charge for the Ewamian People who has referred the matter to the lawyer from the NQLC to complete the formalities, that there are NO sacred site or environmental issues whatsoever with this proposed mine and that there was "no way that she would have sent it to the NQLC if she had ANY doubts".

    AND, the ACTUAL owners, the Terrys, HAVE agreed to the mine proceeding!!!!
    So, there are NO conflicting issues with either the actual owners re use of THEIR land and the TOs re effects on sacred sites and environment issues who have referred to matter to the NQLC for settlement.

    The two essential issues from this forum that I believe to be what we should be concentrating on are what Dugsab said re the actual technical processes and especially the cost and what Towie says that management should most certainly provide full details of progress developments (a) re the TO agreement (b) re the EOPL agreement re mining and milling.

    The lack of ANY information, which is currently the case, creates the huge doubts that you now see in this forum where it has reached a stage where we are being asked to state why we could have many years still to wait.

    That very situation and the serious doubt that this question on HC HAS created, has made the LACK of information from management just as MATERIAL as actual developments.

    THAT is the absolute reason why management MUST keep everyone informed and why we have rules such as the "CONTINUOUS DISCLOSURE" rules set by the ASX.

    Or, is the ASX just as impotent as ASIC with what we are hearing about what has been going on FOR YEARS with the financial institutions?
    I have referred the question to Peter Wright to at least let him know what is going on with shareholders and maybe get some response.


    Some reading for those interested while we wait. Let's se what's in next week's QR.


    http://nqlc.com.au/index.php/services/eds-team/fame/

    http://www.nntt.gov.au/futureacts/Pages/default.aspx (Where the right to negotiate applies, the Tribunal can assist the parties to reach agreement through mediation. If the parties are unable to reach agreement, any of them may apply to the Tribunal for a determination.
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add LNY (ASX) to my watchlist

Currently unlisted public company.

arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.