court dates, page-29

turville,

you'll only ever make me laugh... "righting a wrong", if you want to see some choice wrongs give yourself a history lesson and have a look at CHM's track record of what they do to their share holders. And you are next !!!

Please explain to me in your infinite wisdom why Piper Alderman are a more 'appropriate' legal firm than AH. Perhaps they're willing to do the job for free, and those greedy bastards at AH actually want to get paid... (the audacity)

It wasn't that long ago when the main thrust of your team mates' argument was how talented and astute AH lawyers were. "If the case had no merit, a big gun like AH would not have taken on the case" was echoed in this forum on a daily basis. But maybe that was a bit before your time, or you just have a selective memory.

I don't need to ring CHM up to ask them questions about the fate of my investment because I wouldn't be deluded enough to invest any money in a dodgy court case. You're just taking at face value, what your company is telling you. What exactly are the arrangements I wonder ? And besides, when I have some spare time, I might even do you a little favour, and at the same time satisfy my curiosity: It's just my humble opinion, but I wonder if CHM are complying with the relevant disclosure provisions of the Corporations Act, by not disclosing the funding arrangements of the case and therefore 'their very existence'.

Just contemplate this if you haven't already. Chameleon Mining is a misnoma, because they're not mining anything. Have a look at CHM activities reports and you'll see that their principal activities are the litigation. If there is no case then there is no CHM. If you lose then you're toast the next day.

Just look at it this way turville, you are in actual fact a litigation funder, because the money you invested in CHM is funding the case (don't know for how much longer), so this other litigation funder is not your joint venture partner but your competitor, because they'll get paid long before you do.

And one more thing. Please don't come here and take the moral high ground about 'righting wrongs'. CHM are not white knight crusaders but extortionists.

Here's your homework for the weekend turvey:

1. google 'greenmail'
2. look at the timeline of CHM's actions and announcements
3. take note how they coincide with certain MMX milestones

Then, let's have a debate on whether the CHM litigation is a righteous moral crusade or an opportunistic greenmail exercise.

Enjoy your weekend.