In the Union article of October 17th, “Mine hits financial, time snags,” David Watkinson was quoted as saying that Emgold had cut off negotiations with Dunn Capital Partners:
Emgold recently announced it had cut off negotiations with Dunn. Watkinson said his firm was partly scared off by a lawsuit filed by another company against Dunn for allegedly not coming through on a similar financing deal.
But Dunn Capital, in its press release today, gave a very different explanation:
The decision was several-fold, based on review of Emgold’s proposed IMM project’s impact to an urban location, citizen petitions, the risk of water loss to local wells, the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act and hydrologist reports. In combination of inadequate support documents to prove the adherence to California’s Environmental Quality Act, Dunn Capital Partners had no choice but to end talks with Emgold on the IMM project. “As a private investment company, it is our responsibility to be more pro-active in taking an extra step to assess how a project can impact the area and regions of that community,” explains Michael Bailey, Head of Equity Capital Markets. Paying attention to the reaction generated by Californians of the targeted region has reinforced their decision.
It reminds me of that old Seinfeld episode in which George is about to dump his girlfriend, but before he can open his mouth, she dumps him, using the line he was just about to use on her, “It’s not you, it’s me.”