taking a good look, page-14

Have a listen to the radio broadcast they have on file and draw your own view.

yes the condition precedent they refer to has got me thinking to. why not tell us.


So trawling through a mountain of data i am guessing that either

1. York energy had a time frame to get government approvals and failed to do so, or maybe

2. monies paid to date were meant to be held in a trust account subject to all conditions of the sale were met and failed to do this or maybe,

3. york Energy knew about short comings in the resource model and failed to disclose this to the purchaser, or maybe

got me stuffed.

What completely legged me and i open the topic for your input punters, is that York Energy NL (the vendor)seems to be a private company registered in Perth.

Regarding Patersons

Yep their latest recommendation to their long suffering clients is that Zyl is a hold and wait for it , with a target price of 5c. That makes for a 60% gain when they wrote it. So 60% gain is not enough to render it a buy.
And a buy could have been more appropriate recommendation given their concerns for the stretch on ZYL's balance sheet will now be resolved because of the relief that will come from cancelling the deal by Zyl.

I note from recent press articles the same broker posted a substantial operating loss for the past year.

You only make a profit in broking by high volume transaction. ( well thats not entirely true but not here not today)

When I was in broking you got us to the fact that a hold recommendation ( macquarie hows it going boys ) meant sell it.
Sells rarely were published so as not to upset the company client we had extracted fees from. Never admitted and never discussed but thats what was the bare faced fact.

I also have some very private thoughts in the manner in which the P Broker analyst attitude on question time on the company telecast question time with Zyl.

I note when i was broking with macquarie my brother was broking with patersons. He left for reasons not for this forum.

Flux