keeping pmm honest, page-7

Incognito, almost a logical summation except for the following:There is no provision for a 5th Director from PMM unless one of the existing directors resigns or is pushed, or GWR act exceedingly wislely and offer Mehan or Piercy a directorship prior to the meeting.The deposit paid for the tenements will not be an issue if the shareholders agree to the purchase. Correct, but what is your opinion if the shareholders vote against the purchase?As to the necessity of the purchase at this time, they have 125km to drill/explore, this minor part of the potential tenements are irrelevant UNTIL THE REST IS EXPLORED AND MINED.At present the payment represents at least 8% of the capital of the company and have triggered a potential 33% requirement for extra capital (25 million shares and 25 million options). This is a nonsense at this point of the business cycle.If they mined 10 mtpa for three years, and needed the tenements they would be better to pay $15 million and 5,000,000 shares at that point in time having cash flow and a successful business model rather than a postulate and a prayer which is where they are now. They are buying now with REAL money and shares they can ill afford to dilute at this time.

The amazing facts that I find unreasonable and difficult to understand is why is the GWR board intent upon diluting capital PRIOR to revaluation and posting corporate wins, firstly the disgraceful FAS takeover and now the untimely purchase of tenements that are not CRUCIAL to a successful business model.

GWR should stick to its knitting and let cash flow from iron ore purchases or takeoff agreements be the measure of how much they spend on additional tenements.

The Question: Will a chinese, indian or other buyer be concerned about the addition of these tenements- Not if they are a bargain, but if they are going to have to buy 50% more shares to gain that resource- CERTAINLY NOT