Originally posted by Barry81
how are you determining this? why would axiom submit landholders support after all they have been through if they didn't have it. on the same note why would the sig issue axiom a LOI if they weren't confident that axiom had landholders support.
I am noticing a lot of posters spruiking an agenda and it wouldn't surprise me if those same people were trying to also undermine axioms bid. must be getting close to moving the whole thing forward. ps that particular land holder can pay axiom back the 4m that axiom spent on his ground and run with the Chinese if he likes.
don't reck it for the other landholders.
"why would axiom submit landholders support after all they have been through if they didn't have it. on the same note why would the sig issue axiom a LOI if they weren't confident that axiom had landholders support."
Indeed why did they do precisely the same thing the first time, only to be found out land owner support wasn't there. Obviously they think they can cut corners. And likewise the first time this happened Axiom convinced SIG to give an LOI. And likewise the first time, Axiom threatened an appeal and legal action when they were denied.
Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. SP is understandably dropping like a rock.
