facing the music, page-13

They don't have a duty to inform AGS? They agreed in the JV to act in good faith. By withholding information.......is that acting in good faith? I think not!

If it is written in the JV they agreed to act in good faith and it is universally agreed that means they provide reports on prospectivity why not tell me this in your reply to my post. I raise the point because this is there defence according to what I read. This is there defence and no one here can be bothered considering it. Presumably the court case and judgement is not a consideration for shareholders.

They would have renewed anyway? I've been accused of posting statements that others take as fact when it is only my opinion. I think you might be doing the same thing here 3gb.

Your comprehension is abysmal, I am not saying they wouldnt have renewed, it is Heathgate and its lawyers who in my opinion seem to be saying prospectivity wasnt material. I am raising the point in the hope some one will share some ideas if it is a reasonable defence or not.

Anyway sell if you want but don't come back on here crying when it becomes a multibagger.

I want to, and if I can get .23 I will be about 50% up from 2011 (I have held since 2008, but sold out that parcel at a small loss) You are welcome to your multi bagger, I havent cried about a share investment yet and I cant see my self doing so even if it goes to $5.00 Possibly if circumstances avail I will buy back in. Adios