Replying to lifefree:Your original argument was that they went...

Replying to lifefree:

Your original argument was that they went with the Navajo over the Hualapai for a mining partner. Instead of pivoting your argument to the Navajo coal mines being shut down please answer me as to why it's bad for AZL that they went with the 200 times as many members (your figures) Navajo tribe as opposed to a much smaller tribe that doesn't even have a mining company?

Please send me a link to the website of the Hualapai mining company, I'm curious to see what services they can offer over say a 200 times larger tribe with an existing mining company.

"Has AZL ever run a successful mining company?"

Boy it's hard to argue with you on that point, oh wait no it isn't. Have any speculative mining stocks listed on the ASX ever run a successful mining company?

You could have said the same thing about RIO and FMG once upon a time.

I'm nowhere near the smartest most knowledgeable person here and even I find it pretty easy to poke holes in your arguments without have to resort to toilet humour (pun intended).