Ann: Change in substantial holding, page-78

-I asked you to flick me and email so I could substantiate my claim, which you’ve disputed.
You didnt flick me an email so clearly your not interested in the facts, just imaginary scenarios which work in managements favour.
Refresher:

• - “Strangely, he also bought a heap of stock in a shell that I think MIGHT be used, if my line of thinking is close to the mark.”

More speculation on your part… either put the shell name up and give people the opportunity to assess it themselves or keep this to yourself.
Why don’t you email the shell name to some of the people behind the 249D and let them review it if you don’t want to make it public?

- Your comments about WW not being serious about the LOI… well this is a farce.
Imo they have approached the LOI more seriously then they have approached the process of taking Goulamina to be mined.
At the AGM they said they knew of the need to hire appropriate staff and as yet nothing.
Where are we at with out MOU partners… are they still around?
Any new MOU’s?

We sure did spend time negotiating that LOI though.
So once again, at face value there has been more effort put into this LOI which was poorly constructed than setting us up for mining.
There seems to have been more effort put in by the guys spearheading the 249D to find capable staff... we have a team.
What does WW have?

- Glad you agree with me on the lack of communication.

Follow up questions for you though. That is if you're interested in answering:
1. Maybe you can tell me your views of GAS as an investor?
2. How often do you speak to management and are you comfortable with their answers?