Thanks JJ40 for your very revealing post. This post paints a good picture of the mood and factors that we may be dealing with. From my perch in Seatlle, here are the points that stick out to me. Of the two options that are being contemplated by the government and Centerra (the third - outright cancellation is not even considered bv the gov.), I think the taxation one would give Centerra the most permanance - ( if you can call it that in KG.) They would be in control of the operation and pay a percentage of receipts.  The second one, a joint venture, is a little bit tricky. Centerra says that it is proposing just such an arrangement. This JV would be a SEPARATE ENTITY registered in Kyrgyzstan - a partnership. The two sides could work out how much each owns of the JV. It is encouraging that the gov. is using PriceWaterHouseCoopers as its advisor to establish a fair split. But here's the tricky part. The gov. says it wants control over the JV even if its percentage is not a majority.  Joint ventures can be disbanded if one partner decides to step out. That would be Kyrgyzstan's "control".  Centerra would be left in limbo again.  It sounds like less permanance at the whim of its partner.  I would be happy with a taxation arrangement for us, leaving us in control and "better" security.  It would take complete denunciation to kick us out - less likely.   Merrily we roll along.  The plot thickens.  GLTA