Thu, Apr 24, 2014, 4:49 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 4 hrs 41 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Barrick Gold Corporation Message Board

  • gfchile gfchile Jan 28, 2012 11:57 AM Flag

    MWR retracts offer to ABX

    There has been no discussion about this. Hopefully someone will have some mature comments for this.

    Why hasnt ABX responded to the latest PR from MWR indicating that they are withdrawing any opportunity for ABX to prove ownership to them?®ion=C

    Also interesting to note that MWR AGM yesterday resulted in a 60% plus spike in price.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Even with ample notice from PF, there are still individuals who continue to ignore, bash, and harrass the comments but when MWR squeezes the clamps to ABX at law Peter Munk and company will hopefully struggle for breath and go down with their sinking ship

    • Anger, no. Proper authorities contacted, yes.

      Funny, a year ago most on here said ABX would sue MWR including you mtstack.. hasn't happened, now it’s been understood "the proper authorities are involved".

    • I have no interest in posting at ihub. I like the debate here. I don't want to get sucked into another forum, I'd likely not post at all once clarity on the Pascua Lama ABX fraud is apparent.

      Whats you reason for posting continual unrealated stuff on multiple boards quer? Since you say you're a 30 year MWR investor, why did you just start posting on every forum only recently? Buying MWR at $.08, you're doing better then most I'd say.

    • He who laughs last, last better and longer pal.

      laugh all you want at such serious matters as Market fraud.

      All out of decent, honest responses in one issue you get caught, you immediately jump to another issue and more empty bunch nothingness.

      For your information empty handed, Chile sent such a legal evidence to Canada, in accordance to my sources, that shall make people like you go into mental chaos.

      Imagine Barrick's MM's and investors.

      I shall seat tight for more news.

      My Crystal ball reads:

      MWR 88

      ABX 0

      Few minutes left to play in the fourth quarter of PASCUA SUPERBOWL.

      What a legal rout!

      stay tuned.

    • LOL I think you have anger issues.

      The proper authorities are been involved and I'm sure the investigation will come to an interesting conclusion.

    • If that is the case why don't you post on the Ihub under VOODOO

    • Quer, sorry you feel that way. Without wasting too much time responding to your reply which has zero to do with the issues I’ll just say this, I have an interest in the subject, it is hugely relevant to ABX. It's good to talk with the investing community and unlike yourself quer I involve myself in debate by trying to provide facts and sharing my DD with others.

      Happy investing quer.

      P.S. quer, how’s your original $.08 MWR investment doing? Still holding MWR?

    • Sorry, voo doo, but do you have a personal problem with Mstack posting on a site that he has shares in. Or do you have a vendetta against anyone that doesn't agree your program or do you troll all of these sites to find some one in an argument and jump in like you are a part of it, grow up much like you came down on me and a few others about something you know nothing about stop please you look like a fool!Mstack in readings on these sites has never run down MWR just asked questions , and most pertinent why are we doing this on ABX's site when we have our own? So answer me why are you ranting on a site that you have nothing to do with

    • In MWR's June 7th 2011 News release titled: "Option Agreement Mina Pascua Property", MWR says:

      "Barrick in its March 29, 2011 letter threatened to sue Mountain-West for defamation. Mountain-
      West retained a very well known Vancouver lawyer specializing in the law of defamation. Many
      weeks ago that defamation lawyer made written requests that Barrick provide:

      (a) a map setting out the deposit and the mining claims of Lopehandia and Barrick; and

      (b) copies of all of the Chile judgments."

      So mtstack2000, stop your BS!

      mtstack, MWR has comunicated with ABX privatly through lawyers 10 months ago. ABX threatened to sue MWR on March 29th 2011 and Barrick DID NOT SUE MWR. MWR has continued asserting ABX has frauded the public markets. Please stop telling lies in this public forum mtstack.

      MWR has information which MWR Shareholders and the public want to be made available to the public.

      The Authorities are involved and MWR also has the right to inform its shareholders and the public markets with what information they have rencently obtained.

      Good for MWR in being transparent and honest and using the public market as it was originaly intended. ABX has opened themself up to liability, ABX has been less then transparent and not at all honest and acted with disregard for the public interest and that of Canadians. MWR has given ABX ample time for Barrick to tell the truth.

      mtstack crying about MWR is pointless, what does matter is ABX and what is going on at Pascua Lama, is it ABX fraud? MWR right now is the confident one against a Giant. Where's the ABX lawsuit? What happend to ABX and the threats of legal action against MWR on March 29th 2011? Why did the TSX allow MWR to continue trading? Why is MWR continuing even after the Authorities being contacted? ABX has problems at Pascua Lama, is the public market ready for that fact yet?

    • I'm not sure what experience you have in the business world, but normally corporations do not conduct business by press release. If the management of one corporation wants to convey information to or has requests of the management of another corporation, the usual method of communication is a personal phone call, or, if justified, a letter from the corporate attorney. Corporations usually don't act in a manner equivalent of the sophomoric behavior of writing insults on the bathroom stall. The unorthodox method MWR used to communicate and then revoke their "invitation" is as rightfully ignored by Barrick as a mature person would ignore any other childish provocation.

      • 2 Replies to mtstack2000
      • I am experienced in the business world. My response to position is simple:

        All other forms of recourse no doubt have been pursued. I believe that this is now in the public forum because attempts at communication have arrived at an impass.

        My belief is that JL-MWR have the appropriate documentation proving ownership. They just gave adequate time for ABX to publicly respond to these allegations... They did.

        Now here we are, MWR has taken away their offer. They have indicated that they have proof.

      • This ABX/MWR Pascua Lama issue has been going on for a year now, how do we know private communication has not already occurred between the companies?

        ABX has shown liability to MWR… “Publicly”. MWR has allowed ample time for ABX to come clean with regard to the issues in Chile, Pascua Lama.

        ABX is publically abusing the public markets and abusing the Chilean people

        ABX ignoring the loss of Chile titles which cover the Pascua mine is not only injurious but juvenile with how we would expect any Canadian company to operate.

        Those who advocate for a closed "private" discussion over this very "public" issue should themself stop and think of those who are being harmed by Barricks “public” actions. They should stop and think of the selfishness of what they‘re asking for. They should stop and think if they would allow a bully to attack another.

        Good for little MWR for trying to allow ABX to meet with them over this issue. Good for little MWR for not backing down publically against their assertion of Barrick fraud and for MWR believing in "the integrity of the capital markets."

    • View More Messages
17.81+0.04(+0.22%)Apr 23 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.