Lets substantiate.
1) We have $18m in the bank ( fact ).
2) We have announced a further drilling campaign ( fact ).
3) A board member who is also our major shareholder will stand trial next year for bribing a politician ( fact ).
4) China consider's corruption an evil, poor Hu ( fact ).
5) Vale lost the Belinga Mine to the Chinese ( fact ).
6) BHP ore is shipped to Asia and they would value opening up European markets, they have the money for acquisitions ( commonsense ).
7) Vale may wish to stop this and consider SDL's better deposit 400km away from the Belinga mine in Gabon ( commonsense )
8) Therefore our board which includes Ken must consider the ramifications of Ken being convicted especially if they are contemplating a Chinese partnership ( commonsense ).
9) What does not make commonsense is why would the board commit to further exploration with limited funds when we have already a proven asset ( " biggest ore body not currently controlled by the big three" ). Pointless unless there is a backer.
10) And why has the above discussion points brought out the best in "stocksontheblock". Instead of attacking me indulge me with your logic.
Zodiac
Well, short of getting past the point of being feed-up with this sort of rubbish, I will indulge once more in your comments:
I will also raise my complete unease with your term of 'our' and 'we'. Who is 'we' and who is 'our'? If you mean we/our because you are a shareholder then I think you might be taking your understanding of ownership just a little too far!
So, I will correct your points:
1. SDL has $18m in the bank at present. This is correct, and based on best judgement (SDL, not 'us' or 'we') they will detail what the money will be used for. IMO, from the latest releases from SDL, and the SPP from a few months ago the earmarked funds where very clear:
Sundance‟s Chief Executive Officer, Don Lewis, said: "The proposed placement and Share Purchase Plan Offer will supplement our existing cash reserves to ensure that the Company has funding in place to continue its current activities on the Mbalam Project through to 2010. This will allow us time to develop arrangements with potential strategic partners and ensure that we are best positioned to advance the project as and when global financial conditions improve.”
So ... not only was the money to be used to "develop arrangements with potential strategic partners", yet it was to "supplement our existing cash reserves to ensure that the Company has funding in place to continue its current activities on the Mbalam Project through to 2010" - WHICH includes drilling/continued drilling.
So, not sure where the conspiracy is?
2. SDL has announced additional (not a campaign) drilling. Yep! Great! See Point 1.
3. He may stand trial next yr August 2010 is still a long way off. I would also add that the person you speak of is accused of making 'secret' payments. He has not been found guilty of doing so. Just a little piece of law for you: the fact that the politician in question has been found guilty of receiving 'secret' payments from certain individuals does not automatically mean the person who made them is guilty of corruption. A clear and distinct difference. Whether you think it is playing with words means nothing, there is a difference.
4. Bu*lsh*t!!!!! The fact Hu has been arrested gives no credibility to your claim. Bribes, corruption, etc in China is something that is political and useful for the Chinese when it suits them. It is not an 'evil' as you claim; it may be 'evil' to you, yet not to the Chinese. Corruption has been prevalent in China for the last 70 yrs, and more so in the last 20 yrs since China has attempted to become a player on the world stage. The fact that Hu stands accused of corruption by China is not the smoking gun you claim, in fact, if you had followed the story and knew something of the history of this - short of what you think you have read - the Chinese authorities knew about, what they consider to be, corrupt payments for many years now. 'Poor Hu' as you put it is the result of a disastrous mess with Rio.
So, the 'evil' you speak of is just rubbish!
As to whether or not the accused KT giving money to GN is 'evil' in the eyes of the Chinese will matter squat. Unless you can prove otherwise - which you can’t!
5. Vale lost the mine to the Chinese? How careless of them, they should keep a better eye on their property – I mean you claim they lost it, which means they had it. However, I fail to see how this is substantiated, or a fact!
6. MMM ... maybe! As for commonsense, I think this is more your assumption or wish, it’s certainly not commonsense. Nor, once again have you given an ounce of proof or evidence to suggest BHP wants this 'European' market. However, I think you mean 'African' as that is where SDL are looking to mine, not Europe. Ohhh, and don’t BHP already ship to Europe?
7. MMM ... maybe! As for commonsense, I think this is more your assumption or wish, it’s certainly not commonsense. Prove it!
8. Assuming he is convicted of a crime, and considering it wont be for at least another 12 months - possibly a lot longer, and the apparent investment will come a lot sooner I don’t see how this is an issue. Or are you suggesting that the Chinese in the face of such a massive deposit of ore etc would not invest because of this? Nice try!
9. Once again, see Point 1, and what bu*lsh*t!
Who is the backer?
Why has it not been announced?
How much has been invested?
When was it invested?
What were the terms?
Well ...? I have never heard such sh*t in my life. You are going to seriously try and get away with saying that SDL and all who manage and work for it are committing suicide by not announcing an investor when there is one? This is what you are saying, and to be honest you could find yourself in court for such claims, so how about putting up or shutting up.
10. Attacking you, well I will be as blunt as I can, without being overly rude. When the clowns from the circus try running the show instead of the ring-master then they need to be brought back into line. You have made claims that really should end you up in court and IMO kicked off this site, yet that’s not my decision.
I don’t need to provide any logic as you call it, you need to back your claims up! It’s that simple. You can’t make a claim just because you want to without backing it! It’s that simple.