If Medinah does eventually use money from production to issue a dividend, is one cent the lowest dividend a company is allowed to issue or can they issue partial cent dividends? If one cent is a minimum we will need at least $15 million of profit for them to issue a dividend, barring Doc’s buy back plans.
I believe they can issue fractional amounts and just round the total up or down to the nearest penny, similar to how they would do a stock divvy.
… same thing as a fractional amount might be expressed as 1-2 cents per 100 shares ( or even per 1000 shares). This would allow quarterly dividents, depending on cash flow generated from early production activities.
1 Like
It was publicly announced back in 2014 that Medinah would be using C&R Consulting of Chile to help facilitate a joint venture deal after the Ulander deal was terminated. The joke at the time was that C&R stood for Claro & Roberto (it’s a joke, not serious). In retrospect, that would be highly improbable. Regardless, that is where the finders fee is probably coming from.
1 Like
I don’t see the problem, in fact looking forward to our BOD getting their hands on that money, that is when some more fun and prosperous things start happening. IMHO
You guys forget a DL600 is in place for tax purposes and they know exactly what they will pay
2 Likes
There are several tax implications that must be considered. First there is the local tax if any on money pulled out of the property at the MDMN-Chile level. Then there is the Chilean tax if any on money moved out of MDMN-Chile back to the parent company MDMN-USA ( I assume this is where the DL 600 comes into play). and then there is MDMN-USA corporate income tax if any as well as the individual tax if any on the distributions received by the shareholders.
I haven’t studied the tax implications, but I do recall in the recent past there has been a MANDATE under Chilean law that public corporations PAY DIVIDENDS at a rate of 30% of profits - and that is BEFORE any taxes are taken out (i.e. pre-tax). I’m not sure this is the case still.
1 Like
MB, see if you can dicipher this
http://www.ey.com/GL/en/Services/Tax/International-Tax/Alert--Chile-enacts-tax-reform
Bottom line on the tax issue is, it’s very complex. The U.S. has a tax credit for foreign taxes paid, and a dividend received deduction that may play into the total tax owed, IF IF IF IF MDMN does indeed receive the $100,000,000. There are probably other tax issues that nobody on this board can answer or even knows about. I think the worst case would be that MDMN pays $30,000,000 in taxes and loans and would get to keep $70,000,000 (see calculation above). Mike, has been told the taxes would be minimal (probably coming from LES, so you be the judge). Assuming no taxes, the best case would be that MDMN keeps $97,000,000 ($100,000,000 less $3,000,000 in loans). So in my mind we have a loosely calculated range of between 70 mil and 97 mil that MDMN would retain. MY HOPE IS, WE DO IN FACT HAVE A TAX PROBLEM!! My other hope is that the people running MDMN don’t try to steal 5-10 mil off the top by charging bogus fees.
There’s a reason this was in bold print:
“The extensive molybdenum anomaly, the presence of hydrothermal breccia, the high Copper – Molybdenum results on that breccia and the age of the mineralization, are showing to AURYN Mining Chile team that is in front of a new Porphyry Copper system and this new discovery is opening the cretaceous porphyry belt to the south of Llahuin and Andacollo porphyries on the IV region in Chile”.
1 Like
I am glad that I am not the only one that thinks “that the people running MDMN don’t try to steal 5-10 mil off the top by charging bogus fees”
2 Likes
Hey, has anybody heard whether the positive Medinah shareholder update provided by Karra last week will be put out on the news wires? It will be crazy if it is not.
1 Like
They always are, give it a little time…
lnd1,
I don’t have PM on I-Hub. Regarding your message, I believe you have confused something and attributing a quote to me that I never said, and I’m not sure where you got it from. My post that was deleted was a copied exchange between Zotron and Baldy. This is the post in its entirety:
[quote]The Ulander comparison is not really a valid one as Ulander was previously a convicted criminal and was already playing shell games with his other companies and properties when ADL entered into the Amarant umbrella. Plus it was JJ who was enamored with Ulander, not the BOD, though they were certainly complicit or negligent in allowing JJ to move forward with him. Finally, Medinah was the only company/property that escaped from that debacle relatively unscathed aside from the opportunity cost and further damage to investor confidence and reputation. All other companies either got ripped off or all went bankrupt as a matter of course.
Regardless, anyone who has been following the tape knows that Auryn is no Ulander. Do you really think Auryn will ever relinquish or otherwise permit unfettered control of the $100 million to this BOD? I certainly don’t.
Here is a timely exchange from another thread:
Question to Bald Eagle from Zotron:
So, I believe what you are suggesting is that Auryn will not advance monies to MDMN to purchase undervalued shares but will instead, continue to accumulate shares of MDMN while also adding BOD positions until they get control of MDMN. Upon attaining control they will then exercise the option, pay the $100million to MDMN and since they have control of MDMN they will in fact have control of the $100million.
Response from Bald Eagle:
"They could maintain control over the $100M by either:
a) A tender offer.
b) Achieving a controlling interest in MDMN through open market purchases.
c) A simultaneous RTO and Option Exercise.
d) Re-negotiating the $100M for shares of AMC/Maglas.
e) Earmarking the $100M for debt reduction and capex (restrictive legend)."
[/quote]