greenland parliament, real numbers, page-26

you are correct

in it's current form, with the current management, if you can call the inexperienced unqualified people and what they have been doing management (it is really an oxymoron to call these guys management), yes, i am quite negative on ggg.

the stock came at almost $2. 3 years ago, it is now around $0.60, it has been as low as $.018. we were told it was going to many dollars. it hasn't done so.

the management pays huge and ridiculous fees for consulting to companies that don't have any consulting duties. why?

the management lost over 200million dollars, just a mistake (accounting?), then they accounted for it incorrectly, then they changed the accounting, then they wrote the whole thing off. again, 200+ million gone, oops.

the top 3 in the management of this company over the past three years have paid themselves (i say this because they are not only executives but they also sit on the board) 3 million dollars a year in cash and stock. that means the top 3 executives have paid themselves over 27 milliion in cash and stock in the past 3 years.

during this time our stock has gone from about $1.75, to around $0.60., why are they paid sooo much?

the one thing we know is their compensation is not based on results, unless their plan pays them more as the company loses more money.

also the management has seen fit to borrow money from the company for their own uses, this from a company that is not exactly overcapitalized. has it been paid back, did they pay market interest, good questions, who knows?

the management has also chosen to lend money from the companies' assets to other companies, that seem to be their friends. did they receive anything from those companies personally for making the loans from the company money, did the money all come back, was interest paid on it. these are all good questions don't you think?

the bigger questions with the loans is, why, if you have a company where your burn rate is telling you you will run out of money, would you as responsible management even consider lending some of your precious capital to a fledgling startup company. especially when you are supposed to be a mining company not a venture capital lending company.

next, the ggg management and their chosen chairman and md of the greenland company, gme a/s, have done about as bad a job as possible in terms government relations. they have succeeded in alienating the entire regulatory and the political membership of the greenland government. the company is not held in high regard by those who regulate them, great position to be in huh? good job by our executives.

and now the company is frozen. it can do absolutely nothing with its only asset, the kvanefjeld license. they must do a study which they no nothing about and get it approved before they can do anything. if they are ever to do anything with this asset again. which is now very much inquestion.

given the low esteem they are held in by those who will have to approve the study, they may well have a big problem ever getting said study approved.

and what do we hear from the ggg md. he says this is good news, he wrongly states that the new regulations represent a change in the no uranium "zero tolerance" policy. the reason i say his statement is wrong, is because the Greenland government put out a statement shortly after he said this and reiterated that the zero tolerance policy in fact hadn't changed at all.

so that is some of the reasons i am negative on ggg and its management.

hope that helps you

cheers mate