Rio Tinto reaches $138.75 million settlement over Mongolian mine
NEW YORK (Reuters) -Rio Tinto agreed to pay $138.75 million to settle a lawsuit accusing the Anglo-Australian mining giant of defrauding investors by failing to disclose problems with its $7 billion underground expansion of the Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold mine in Mongolia, according to court records.
A preliminary settlement was filed late on Wednesday with the U.S. District Court in Manhattan, and requires a judge's approval.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
While institutions own 38% of Fleetwood Limited (ASX:FWD), retail investors are its largest shareholders with 48% ownership
The considerable ownership by retail investors in Fleetwood indicates that they collectively have a greater say in management and business strategy A total of 16 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership Insiders own 10% of Fleetwood We've found 21 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yield of over 6% next year. See the full list for free. To get a sense of who is truly in control of Fleetwood Limited (ASX:FWD), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 48% to be precise, is retail investors. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company. And institutions on the other hand have a 38% ownership in the company. Institutions often own shares in more established companies, while it's not unusual to see insiders own a fair bit of smaller companies. Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Fleetwood, beginning with the chart below. View our latest analysis for Fleetwood Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index. Fleetwood already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This suggests some credibility amongst professional investors. But we can't rely on that fact alone since institutions make bad investments sometimes, just like everyone does. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Fleetwood's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story. Fleetwood is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is Sandon Capital Investments Limited with 9.2% of shares outstanding. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 8.2% and 6.5% of the stock. A closer look at our ownership figures suggests that the top 16 shareholders have a combined ownership of 50% implying that no single shareholder has a majority. Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. There is some analyst coverage of the stock, but it could still become more well known, with time. While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves. I generally consider insider ownership to be a good thing. However, on some occasions it makes it more difficult for other shareholders to hold the board accountable for decisions. It seems insiders own a significant proportion of Fleetwood Limited. Insiders have a AU$26m stake in this AU$249m business. We would say this shows alignment with shareholders, but it is worth noting that the company is still quite small; some insiders may have founded the business. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling. With a 48% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Fleetwood. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run. It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Fleetwood better, we need to consider many other factors. For instance, we've identified 3 warning signs for Fleetwood that you should be aware of. If you are like me, you may want to think about whether this company will grow or shrink. Luckily, you can check this free report showing analyst forecasts for its future. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Justin Baldoni Drops Taylor Swift Extortion Claims, Blake Lively's Lawyers Respond
Justin Baldoni's legal team has dropped its subpoena against Taylor Swift, which previously claimed Blake Lively's team was trying to extort the music star. The subpoena dropping was confirmed by a spokesperson for Lively (via TheWrap), with Lively's legal team saying they were 'pleased' that Baldoni's team stopped a 'harassing' probe into Swift and Lively's relationship. 'We supported the efforts of Taylor's team to quash these inappropriate subpoenas directed to her counsel and we will continue to stand up for any third party who is unjustly harassed or threatened in the process,' the spokesperson said. 'The Baldoni and Wayfarer team have tried to put Taylor Swift, a woman who has been an inspiration for tens of millions across the globe, at the center of this case since day one,' the statement continued. 'Exploiting Taylor Swift's celebrity was the original plan in Melissa Nathan's scenario planning document, and it continues to this day. Faced with having to justify themselves in federal court, they folded. At some point they will run out of distractions from the actual claims of sexual harassment and retaliation they are facing.' In a letter filed in court last week (via THR) from Baldoni's lawyer Bryan Freedman, Baldoni's team alleges that Michael Gottlieb, who is representing Lively, reached out to the legal firm that represents Swift, Venable. According to the letter, Gottlieb 'demanded that Ms. Swift release a statement of support for Ms. Lively, intimating that, if Ms. Swift refused to do so, private text messages of a personal nature' would be released. Freedman's letter went on to say that Swift's legal team responded to the request in at least one written message. The letter Freedman entered into court is looking to have those communications released, claiming that they prove that Lively's team is essentially trying to intimidate a witness in Baldoni and Lively's ongoing legal battle. In response to the letter, Gottlieb said that the accusations are 'categorically false,' and that the use of anonymous sources is 'cowardly' from Freedman. The post Justin Baldoni Drops Taylor Swift Extortion Claims, Blake Lively's Lawyers Respond appeared first on - Movie Trailers, TV & Streaming News, and More.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Government says Harvard researcher accused of smuggling frog embryos brought 'biological materials'
BOSTON (AP) — Attorneys argued over whether a Harvard researcher accused of smuggling frog embryos brought 'biological materials' into the U.S. in a court hearing Wednesday. Kseniia Petrova, a Russian-born scientist conducting cancer research for Harvard Medical School, appeared in Massachusetts federal court Wednesday for a probable cause hearing, where government and defense attorneys argued over whether she brought 'biological materials' into the U.S., ABC News reported. She was returning from a vacation from France in February when she was questioned by U.S. Customs and Border Protection at Boston Logan International Airport. Petrova, 30, had stopped at a lab specializing in splicing superfine sections of frog embryos and obtained a package of samples for research. Federal officials on the social media website X accused her of lying about 'carrying substances' into the country and alleged that she planned to smuggle the embryos through customs without declaring them. She told The Associated Press in an interview in April that she did not realize the items needed to be declared and was not trying to sneak anything into the country. Petrova was told her visa was being canceled and detained by immigration officials in Vermont after her initial arrest. She filed a petition seeking her release and was briefly sent to an ICE facility in Louisiana, after which a judge ruled the immigration officers' actions were unlawful. In May, she was charged with one count of smuggling. The Homeland Security Investigations agent who wrote the affidavit in support of the criminal complaint, Brian Goldsworthy, testified Wednesday that Petrova would not have been able to leave the airport had she declared the frog embryos in her luggage, ABC News reported. He said that Customs and Border Protection agriculture experts and a federal laboratory that reviewed the samples deemed them to be biological material, ABC News reported. Petrova's attorney argued it was unclear what definition the government was operating under and the requirement to declare items entering the country doesn't hinge on whether something is a biological material, ABC News reported. After Wednesday's hearing, both sides will now have the opportunity to submit briefs to the judge. If convicted of the smuggling charge, Petrova faces a sentence of up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
