ann: fml to raise 227.5 mill via placement, page-192

JS now that is much better it does not come across as an angry rant well done.

When you talk feathers and take a swipe at me for talking rocks when this is a mining company I have to doubt you.

Pig farms was an example aimed at explaining simply that those with money can make things happen. This needed to be stated IMO.

Corporate comment - still a wild statement for you to combine a rant against talking 'rocks' (even if 'sort of' in your words) in a mining venture with don't talk about them and now you claim obliquely you are corporate but no confirmation. Why not relay a well considered corporate view for smaller investors? I believe high level corporate experience over a couple of decades is of value to readers in here absorbing so much anger and 'trite' as you put it. Some of your speculation is just that IMO.

Yes, yawn I have heard of corporate raiders. If we can got off that sort of comment you will find I don't make the sort of comments you get sensitive about too.

JS I just think you are speculating well beyond commercial common sense at this stage. Joining dots that don't exist yet. You are indeed 'jumping' at the start. Well I am also writing in the country so be it.

Your point 1 - the $227.5M will not be paid in dividends this is true however the picture here is over simplified. Cash reserves are not earnings - we start to make good earnings and part of the $227.5M remains in the books as it should - easy to separate. You stated "I thought is was a simple concept." - what as if I don't understand is that your point because I think you missed what I say on this point totally.

Your point 2 - you state "Seems you believe only divvies are available to SD." NO I am pointing out logically that we can grow and pay dividends to shareholders - all shareholders I don't know what dots you joined on that score and seem to be trying to score a point. The statement is not logical or commercial JS. Statements like assist me to make conclusions about a poster - sometimes wrong I admit.

Your point 3 - with FML holding 4 seats on the Board I do not see any stupid hedge being passed - again not commercial when SGG and FML believe the price is rising. Bank finance would be far more likely to require a hedge - commercial reality. The SGG money however comes with no such strings it is an injection by a shareholder. BIG difference. I also point out the FML track record on hedging enough said.

Your point 4 - is political and no argument however one point I would like to make is that you have introduced emotive valuation. Not a commercial comment at all. I refer to: "(how does 5c and 51% sound?)". This is true and holders all believe this is cheap. The commercial reality is that FML were trading at 4.4c and $190M M/Cap by insto's and Aussies at the point of announcement and less before that - and SGG have stumped up $227.5M against that.

Your point 5 - glad you are trying, so am I we are on the same page there. I will assume there was no innuendo I am not taking that comment personally.

Your point 6 - off the mark IMO because I AM stating how this all translates into money. That is the theme of my posts. This is mining JS we turn rocks into money and I am trying to tell you and readers how: the capital injection + the ground position translate into SP and divvies (for all) on a COMMERCIAL BASIS. For the record I did not appreciate your point 6 at all - "sort of" indeed.

Your point 7 - yep agreed but 51% does not 'always win' unless close to the wind on the right side of the line and the Board (FML4 - SGG3) allow it. I am not saying this is not impossible.

Your point 8 - see above on many points & again you are making all sorts of unqualified assumptions and I question them politely.

CW
DYOR&DD