concerns , page-24

Hi All,
Thanks for all the replies. Lets keep it friendly and work together.
I'll be a bit more open with what I know.
Firstly I am not really a layman. I am a physicist (nuclear) by quals and worked in Qld for the past 6years under contract as an enviro scientist (until a few month ago, now I pursue my own resource business interests).
I bought into MKY originally for the tenements ie I did research on Qld U tenements, through NRM records, archived mining reports etc (apon hearing originally from the horses mouth ie Beattie that U mining would be allowed in Qld, yes he backflipped and thats not MKY's or anyones fault). Visited tenements directly etc.

I discovered the best tenements and tracked who owned them and bought into them (I also bought into pdn, dyl etc real early on, mky and a few others where my next wave so to speak).

So I bought in knowing more about the tenements then in many cases the tenement owners (and I can explain that as the truth just dont want to write 20 pages atm).

Anyway I believe MKY current tenements including Wally 2 is good (i'll personally take it of their hands if they believe otherwise).
And I am extremely confident that the Delminco's Cape York tenements are useless, Rio's done exploration and research on it and found no feasible bauxite in this area, and they aren't the only ones, why you think none of the major players in this region own these tenements? because there is a long history of nothing there without even going into the infrastructure needed to get anything out of this unaccessible region.

This why I am left scratching my head, why are we told a promising tenement MKY's flagship is suddenly useless, and diluting our shares for useless delminco's remote tenements?

Why do the owners of Delminco want MKY shares in exchange if they're already hold promising tenements, and MKYs tenements are useless?

Lost
Kelp2