wolfram camp numbers revisited., page-49

Well, now I understand why the directors hadn't been buying up large at give-away prices.

My DD is as good as anyone elses and I bought in at what appeared to be a safe price.

However I have to take issue with the board on 2 things and I do wonder that although the letter of the ASIC may (?) have been followed, but its the spirit has, IMO, not:

1) On the 30/4 the company announced its March qtr with commentary - nowhere was funding commented upon. Yet the very NEXT day a halt is called to "complete the funding requirements for the Wolfram Camp."

They obviously need the weekend to do whatever negotiations are required but something larger must be in play other than a simple cap. raising. They have obviously accelerated matters since BBY appointed a mere 3 weeks prior on 7/4 & they obviously need the w/end.

2.) Running a company requires good cash & forecasting so its pretty disingenuous to go the whole quarter without comment that they would run short of working capital for the June qtr - these things get monitored internally on a daily basis -they would have known ages ago.

Also the Dec qtr showed their development expend. forecast for the March qtr at $9.3M. The actual was $6.4M. The fact that the contractors ran to time and NO MENTION was made in the March qtrly of capex cost coming significantly under or over budget leads one to the conclusion they have delayed their capex Creditors a little. I give them the benefit of the doubt that they knew whatthey were doing to forecast the $'s [to think otherwise is the last impression they would want].

Well done to the co & mgmt for getting the project this far, but Mr Greenwood you & the board need to understand that this should have been fronted ages ago & matters attended to sooner.