I thought that they were owned by Rio Tinto and Rio divested...

I thought that they were owned by Rio Tinto and Rio divested them, though I don't know how or why.

Quite a few brokers recommend LGL and that's why I bought in without doing the research I should have done.

I'm not usre that they are an attractive take over target. LGL are operating in a developing country with high infrastucture costs. I once attended a presentation by the President of Barrick (the worlds' largest gold company), his point was that Barrick would acquire projects with a cash cost at the bottom 25% of cash operating costs(then US$200 an ounce) so that if Armageddon came (my words) Barrick would always be profitable. He didn't say it but I got the impression that Barrick would not take too many projects in Developing countries. So if other majors think the same way, and I don't know if this isa their way of thinking, then I suspect there would be vary few majors who would want to take on LGL - hence the Rio Tinto position? Having said that the BOD reads like the who's who of the gold industry and have immence credibility.

I would be a lot more comfortable if LGL were to diversify its gold activities into a range of countries instead of having pretty well all thier eggs in one basket, so I guess I will sell on any signficant price recovery.