In what way?
1 Like
From the update:
āTo date, Auryn has not pressed its position as one of the defrauded parties and is letting Medinahās current management work to rectify the situation in a manner that produces the best outcome for all the common shareholders.ā
It looks to me like Auryn as a shareholder was damaged just like the rest of us. There were several posts earlier about common shareholders probably not having standing individually, but it was Medinah that would have to bring a suit for damages. Auryn as the property owner and developer probably wasnāt hurt too much. With that other hat on Iām not sure that they lost much ground in the deal or would be justified in asking for more ownership knowing what we know now. On the other hand maybe their stock purchase of Medinah was an informal gesture and factored into the pricing on the deal.
In a year with the IPO, Medinah and Auryn may be competing for the same investors interested in the ADL. If Medinahās stock structure is still a mess, people will be more interested in buying Auryn to eliminate some risk and weāll be trading at a discount.
I was a little reluctant to post this thought because in saying Aurynās not sacrificing their own self interest to help us. I donāt want to say Iām not grateful to be hitched to their coattails. Our investment would be worthless and non-existent if they werenāt in the picture. Iām very excited about where they are headed and thankful we can tag along. Iām also 110% behind the work that Kevin is doing to keep the two of us linked.
2 Likes
You may want to tell your grapevine to go back to their āsourcesā. This is Medinahās official response when I inquired:
"We have not received a proposed settlement offer from Price.
- Kevin"
6 Likes
As I stated in my post the other day, this is not the same old Medinah. Any rumors anyone hears are not coming from Medinah. Kevin is making sure the company puts an end to that game.
17 Likes
Is it acceptable to respond to your own post and call it flawed. Maybe I should have just deleted it. After thinking on it some more; Iām thinking that Auryn did negotiate a cap on the stock as part of the agreement. Their owners were probably moving ahead toward securing a majority position in the stock. Medinah violated the agreement - they could easily cause a lot of grief for us if they wanted - which we wouldnāt survive in our weakened position. Iām thinking back remembering the meeting in Vegas and realizing that for Medinah shareholders mercy is winning the day and not justice.
2 Likes
I am little surprised at this point that Auryn or Masglas has not filed a lawsuit against JJ for misrepresenting the % ownership via his shares that they purchased.
2 Likes
Karl, They could get a judgment against JJ and end up in the pear business as well as mining.
1 Like
I am greatful that Kevin in protecting his investment has taken us on his coattails and has built a relationship with Maurizio. If not I beleive MDMD would be bankrupt. I might add if Gary Goodin havenāt discovered Les 's fraudulent actions, he and Okanada would have would have bankrupted us before Kevin had a chance to save our investment .
5 Likes
All joking aside, as long as the litigation is leverage against JJ to do what is necessary to have our shares returned, I donāt care,or shut down his pear business. I hope theydonotpull any punches in their legal efforts.
Like I said KMT is a man of his word and trust him 100%. If there is anyone who can get us out of this is him.
9 Likes
It is easy to conclude bankruptcy was the likely goal Les had in mind when drawing up the original agreement for 100 mIllion (100,000,000) Class C Convertible shares sold to Okanadian in exchange for C$100,000. The exchange made no sense on any level as written except as a trap with the goal of making MDMN disappear. On January 11, 2016 Medinah issued a certificate for 100K shares of Class C shares. A month later Okanadian filed itās lawsuit. In view of the fact that Les was aware that Medinah did not have the shares available to convert the number of shares as apparently stated in the original note, and based on previous historical issuance of Class C Preferred shares, it was obvious and understood there was something wrong with the documentation. This was a lawsuit they did not expect Medinah had sufficient financial resources to successfully overcome. This all took place prior to the news of the outstanding shares issue revelation/discovery. I would conclude that given Mr. Priceās involvement in Okanadian, the apparent motive for bringing the suit by Okanadian was to bury MDMN permanently before the fraud and malfeasance of many years could be brought to light.
Was Mr. Price responsible for the so called "scrivenerās error (i.e. was it deliberate with an ulterior motive)? Iāve long thought the primary reason for the Okanadian lawsuit was engineered to accomplish one thing, a coverup of all the undisclosed shares that had apparently been issued and undisclosed prior to earlier agreements being inked with AURYN. The Okanadian case was originally filed in February 2016, shortly after Medinah delivered in good faith the share certificate satisfying the convertible share agreement as it should have been written. Okanadian knew there was no money to successfully defend against the suit that was filed. On May 16, 2016, Medinah accepted AURYNās cashless acquisition of all of Medinahās Altos de Lipangue claims in exchange for 25,000,000 (twenty five million) shares of AURYN, a 25% equity stake in AURYN. It was the best option available to Medinah to secure shareholder equity out of the reach of Les and Okanadian. Had Medinah not transferred the claims to AURYN would Okanadian have made a grab for them in US court?
I think HRās assumption (below) is valid for the GXK Ventures vs. Medinah Minerals and Les Price lawsuits filed in Oct and Nov 2016. These were filed well after the discovery in August 2016 of inaccurate and purposely altered 15c211 reports that had been prepared and filed by Les Price. Les price and company had been caught red handed and exposed publicly. The suits brought by GXK Ventures and Les Price (undoubtedly under the advice of their attorney) had the appearance of nuisance lawsuits from the start aimed only at gaining a bargaining chip in any attempted settlement.
Things will work out on the legal side at itās own pace. It remains to be seen how quickly AURYN can turn itās exploration and exploitation into a respectable cashflow to the benefit of all itās investors. Shareholders have heard the call for patience far too many times, however, now it truly appears warranted.
3 Likes
While none of know for sure Priceās state-of-mind (and I think if we did we might all go mad), but if he had this as his motivation, then he besides an unethical jacka** he really is stupid. Anyone thinking they will skate through a bankruptcy proceeding is badly mistaken. Price was a director/officer of MDMN. BK Trustee take their job very seriously and will actively pursue potential fraud upon the bankruptcy court. I have helped businesses through bankruptcy and they are a very difficult process, even when dealing with a relatively clean company. The trustees often required the voiding and returning of transactions which happened within two years of the date of the filing of any bankruptcy. IMO once the Trustee looked at MDMN books and structure the Trustee would have found the share discrepancy then it would have tracked down where the shares went through the transfer agent. Price would have been at the top of the list of entities receiving shares. The trustee would have dragged Price into the Fed court to void any his transactions. He would have been under watchful eyes of a Federal judge. Please believe me, federal judges have no problem exercising their powers in full to punish persons violating even minor laws or rules. Priceās behavior of his frivolous lawsuits in BC would have most likely resulted in a dismissal and the judge sanctioning him for the frivolous suit and requiring Price to pay MDMNās atty fees. I would have loved to see this matter in federal court (bankruptcy or regular). Price would have gotten killed.
I donāt think any of us can speculate on Priceās motivations as he fits the definition of a sociopath How to Spot a Sociopath | Psychology Today I do not make this statement as a justification for his actions, but rather any relatively ānormalā person would have a difficult time understanding the thought process and/or justifications of a sociopath. He is an abnormal person and IMO we will never understand why he did what he did. You would have a better chance of understanding the life motivations of a pile of sh*t.
Right now all we can do is prevent him from hurting MDMN any farther and hold him responsible for his past actions. I feel Kevin and MDMN are actively moving in this direction and have definately accomplished the first task of preventing Price from hurting MDMN and more. He is out, with no access or control over anything MDMN. The legal end is boxing him into a corner. Hopefully the knock-out happens soon.
8 Likes
Jak,
You are right.
Perhaps a legal bankruptcy is the wrong description for what was envisioned. It was more like MDMN would be unable to meet itās financial obligations, would default to non-reporting status, shares would sink into oblivion, the company would not have funds to mount a vigorous defense and the company would just disappear with Okanadian winning a judgement against MDMN. Where would that have left Medinah as a company and what reparation would Okanadian have been entitled to legally? Pink sheets up and disappear frequently going quietly ābankruptā as a public company when they have legal problems that donāt go away and shares are left worthless on the grey sheets. Fortunately, Medinah is now in a position to address the legal entaglements that have been created by past fraudulent and apparently criminal actions of one or more of itās former officers running the company.
That is what shareholders are hoping for!
3 Likes
Yes. I agree. I could definitely see him thinking this way. Especially since he had all the inside info on MDMN and knew what his actions would do to the company.
1 Like
jak,
Maybe I havenāt followed closely enough, but how has nothing been said about JJ. If, through this process with Les, it is discovered that he (JJ) was involved in the fleecing of shareholders, could he face consequences as well? AS far as I know, litigation is focused at Les right now. How is it possible for Les to accomplished what he did without JJ having knowledge one way or another.
Is it possible MDMN agrees to a diminished settlement for Les in return for Les describing JJās involvement?
Just wondering out loud.
Thanks.
Sorry b I know you want jak opinion but Iāll give you mine. The unfortunate part is JJ is in Chile, so I think going after him will be very difficult. Unless Auryn Masglas goes after him in Chile for falsifying the percentage of ownership he had.jmo
how the hell did Les and JJ ever meet in the first place?
Tinderā¦
3 Likes
At a grifterās convention.