Ann: Operations Update - Browns Oxide Project , page-11

At the AGM I asked two questions in a civilised fashion relating to (1) marketing our image (good PR) and (2)TSX listing and received polite "mind yr own business" replies (1)was considered unnecessary and (2)independent advice siad there would be no advantage in TSX listing. The price was about 285 from memory. At least the kept to their word on that score.

I suspect same kinda replies will be forthcoming at EGM and which would seriously test my civility and pacificism.

So not willing to risk being part of a melee during which Sydneys SWAT might have to be called in. Instead I will register my protest vote nays on all acoounts cos thats what my conscience demands all things more carefully considered now. I suspect there will be plenty of other nays joining mine. But likely result is it will be passed as yeahs cos GT will already have lobbied his support.

I believe if the nays by some Zeus-inspired fluke gain the day, then GT/HNC will be forced to come to the tabel again with major shareholders to revise their price so that total control is not delivered in one fell swoop .... which is what a yeah would do. It may as well be a PRIVATE company if they get combo control and that may not be a bad thing in the long run ....... u know my thuinking at the time when I considered it optimum to part privatise / list on TSX ........ but that wouyld have been without handing GT/HNC the reigns.

I cannot for one moment imagine CMR would be allowed to dissolve into a lose lose for everyone. 2ic syas they have first charge over assets .... I dont they do .... GT tried but then appeared to revise, probably due to outside pressure. If he had such a hold, he wouldnt bother trying this route ......a default would probably have suited. In any case if 2ic is right, then default would place Cornell at same level and that aint wanted obviously. So i suspect there is no charge over company assets and this is one big bluff. Dont think the company has ever clarified this point even tho i suggested 2 ic ask for such to support his speculation.

So yeah, consideringwe are at a small fraction of what we were not long ago, not worried about calling a considered bluff with my residual and forcing them to the negotiating table for equitising at a more (personally considered) realistic fair value so that control is not delivered in one fell swoop.

Having said this i still believe GT holding the reigns is prob the best thing for us long term.

What surpises, no wrong word, AMUSES me is the lack of exposure / presence etc of our CEO who may as well not be a CEO but a GM cos IMO CEO.s need to be good PR managers with independent Olympian vision ..... and if he is, he aint be telling us ! And with INL's chairman also on our Board and recent retiree not replaced, WHAT INDEPENDENCE does the Board have to be able to comment on the Chairman's partialtakeover bid ???

U know I aint against benevolent dictatorships just want to feel comfortable we are being given a fair deal. Consideringthe big hitters behind this company, do u think the current ridiculous 25 mill market cap could not ne improved if such was the intent? So yeah, pardon me if I feel a bit screwed and hence would probably not try and prevent Cuzo and his brick throwing mates haha.

So all things considered, i have stated my case in here and do not wish to have my cool tempted by attendeing a non-EGM ... but instead will vote how i think is in the best long term interests of the common shareholder of which I am one. I want GT/HNC to up the ante on conversion price. But I still want him to lead on the front line with us and hence aim at his 'conscience"

Course being in megabear C-primary is perfect timingfor rape and pillage ...... otherwise known as M&A ...... and this IMO is "A" by HNC on the quiet.

OF COURSE HNC WONT BE SPENDING A BILL ON THE JV ........ they wont have to ........ first they would want only concentrates so they wont need a bill, and second they would want to spend whatever capex on THEIR asset nota JV ....... so either CMR becomes THEIR asset OR they spend the cash on their other asset .....76% owned AII ..... IMO ...... tho am sure CMR is a gem they WANT to make THEIR asset. And once in control of THEIR asset, then they can fudge the profits tio be made in PRC instead of in Oz ..... thats another story.

All opinuion and I feel helpless but gotta say nay.

IMBOOC