Ann: Quarterly Activities and Quarterly Cashflow , page-11

re: Ann: Quarterly Activities and Quarterly C... Lordlucas

MMX announcement dated 29 Feb 2008

In relation to the Koh and Evans case Paul was prepared to vigerously defend and confident that it would ultimately be dismissed. Obviously had a change of heart on that one.

In the same announcement

stated that to the extend CHM claims an interest in Crossland the claim is without foundation.

ie my take on this is that the door was left open in relation to admitting that something may have happened but MMX did not believe that CHM could get their hands on the Crossland shares.

Now the latest shift in wording I find interesting.

.... factual basis for the Chameleon claim so far as it constitutes a claim for a substantial interest in the Jack Hills or Weld Range tenementsand/or Murchison’s shares in Crosslands".

Wording has changed again.

Again my take is that they have left the door open to the fact that something dodgy was done by Grimaldi and Barnes but now they are limiting the damage to a non "substantial interest" in Crossland.

ie we dont think they can get a huge amount of the shares we hold.

The longer this drags on the more Paul changes his wording.

In terms of "substantial" what is that. 5% 10% ??

I also believe based on these words by Paul that the CHM funder is on a no brainer.

CHM will have some form of win and so he will recover his costs. What is unknown is what his reward will be.

And before Cransy starts on about constructive trusts been hard to prove this is the remedy CHM is seeking it is not a type of case !