Thu, Apr 17, 2014, 12:08 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 9 hrs 22 mins


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

Pretium Resources Inc. Message Board

  • bicycle111 bicycle111 Oct 22, 2013 5:20 PM Flag

    SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims On Behalf of Investors of Pretium Resources, Inc. - PVG

    Any thoughts?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • That’s probably first time when U.S.-based legal firms decide to prosecute Canadian gold exploration company. It can set relevant precedent for the industry. U.S. securities laws provide better conditions for prosecution than in Canada; that was likely the reason why U.S. lawyers didn’t bother before with mining stocks.

      It seems that situation changes. Maybe, lawyers have hopes to litigate case in U.S. courts. I am unsure whether these courts can have jurisdiction over the case. If case goes to Canadian courts then settlement could be very light. In other words, jurisdiction is the main (monetary) issue here.

      If I understand correctly (didn’t look at this stock before in details) company posted mineral reserve numbers before and, probably, lawyers could argue that it makes the case relevant to U.S. securities laws. The latter do not care about “mineral resources”, while “mineral reserves” is established regulatory term in U.S. (both terms are regulatory in Canada).

    • By 539 pm, two other firms had piled on. Management couldn't have done more to invite this. (The lawyer I left a message for hasn't returned the call.)

    • Here's the text of an email I sent Pomerantz Law Firm.

      You would be well advised to do your research in depth before you proceed with your class action in re: Pretium. Just because Strathcona says something does not make what Strathcona said true. In particular, you need to do in depth research into whether small scale sampling is likely to be accurate in gold deposits that have an extremely erratic distribution of gold values. It isn’t likely to be accurate and everything Strathcona said is predicated on the premise that it is accurate.

      You should probably start with this primer by Simon Dominy. He works for Snowden and is probably the premier expert in the field of making resource estimates in high nugget effect deposits.

      I’ve attached the PDF to this email.

      You should probably also be aware of the pdf I’ve attached to this email relating to the weaknesses of the statistical approaches Strathcona wanted to take.

      Strathcona was wrong.

      To my mind, they will lose if they go to court but then again maybe all they want is a little greenmail.

      • 3 Replies to sewells831
      • The question is one of whether the company violated the securities laws by failing to disclose material information in a timely way. Right or wrong, Strathcona's statement was material--and you witnessed its materiality today in the market, once PVG disclosed what they should have disclosed two weeks ago. Anyone who bought or perhaps held during those two weeks would have standing as a plaintiff. The legal question will be whether PVG had an obligation to disclose. I guess we'll see. Litigation aside, what kind of fool wants to own shares of a company managed by anyone who would keep this kind of information suppressed for two weeks?

      • Whether Strathcona is right or wrong isn't the issue. These are the issues:

        1. Did management selectively disclose the reasons for Strathcona's resignation?
        2. Did management knowingly withhold Strathcona's dispute and ultimate resignation from the buyers of the 1.5 million share private placement sold at $10.10 per share?
        3. Did management knowingly issue misleading press releases regarding the drill program?
        4. Did management insist upon Strathcona's resignation in effect making it a firing?

        Nobody will know what's in the ground until it's mined. Unfortunately for longs, you need some sucker to give you $700 million to find out. LMFAO

      • I think they may have a good case: Strathcona was one of the hired competent persons. They warned the resource model may be disproven probably months ago. Obviously a competent person is assumed to be the expert on matters, so PVG may have been required to disclose Strathconas objections and leaving judging those statements to shareholders. It is not about who is right or wrong. The PVG share price cratered also due to lower gold prices and there are lots of people trying to blame that on the current case. Another wildcard. At least it will cost PVG and due to the depleting financial situation money spent on legal struggles will multiply the damage as the next round of financing is needed sooner.

        IMO a bad thing for long-term shareholders.

5.56-0.11(-1.94%)Apr 16 4:05 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.