"capital raising is outof thequestion" idc ceo, page-8

Tell me Yurt, what are you doing here on the IDC site of hotcopper.

Do you have any bonafide interest in IDC getting the Mt Kare project to a state of completion?

Or is it some thing else that bring you to comment on IDC.

And why do you assume I can speak for "nectar".

Clearly I can not.

What I can do is comment on LeDerps response to nectars post.

I did so comment.

The basis of my comment stems from the operation of section 117 of the Mining Act (PNG).

MINING ACT
117. Dealing in tenements.
Subject to this Act, a legal or equitable interest in a tenement may be sold, transferred, mortgaged, charged or otherwise encumbered, transmitted, seized under a warrant or writ of execution, or otherwise disposed of or made the subject of any other dealing.
As for some of the other comments you make, there is a huge difference between selling/disposing of the legal title to an asset on the one hand and increasing the capital issue of a public comment on the other.

Sorry, but you don't seem to understand what you are saying in respect os Section 117, if anything at all..

I don’t want to appear to be rude or overly to the point, but if you are responding to what people post here would you please attempt to think through what you say in some manner relevant to what you are purporting to respond to in other peoples written posts.

I say this because you said absolutely nothing about my comments (based on Section 117 of teh Mining Act) which, as you would appreciate, simply demonstrate the limitations of another persons knowledge of mining law and practice and options open to IDC.

I posted this because I think the level of discussion on Hot Copper and IDC has shrunk/sunk to a laughably low level of real content and I don’t like to see other IDC share holders being led up the garden path.

Having said that I really don’t give a two penny toss for people who simply want to flame and bait or what other IDC share holders do.