trading halt, page-46

Mrs P

"Makes me wonder if the recent placement was to raise funds for a settlement?"

No.

It was raised to drill MtM to JORC.

All other funds raised to date have been allocated to BM drilling to JORC, GC drilling, desktop studies, legal fees for MtM and other admin/operational costs.

MNM winning MtM would have meant no money left in the kitty to drill MtM. Cygnet placement now gives MNM the funds to do just that without having to go through another CR without a significant amount of cost or dilution.

Smart move by MNM management.

Who doesn't think that the recent ann on 14/2 re Barkley phosphate sale putting $225K of funds (with a potential $200-400K extra) in the bank account was not made envisaging the success of the MtM legal proceedings?

Again, smart move by MNM management.

$1,350,000 placement + $225,000 phosphate sale = $1,575,000 extra in the bank. Could do a bit of drilling at MtM with that without taking funds away from other projects at BM and GC.

What would you prefer as a SH:

1) An ann saying we have MtM but not the funds to drill and have to do another CR,

or

2) An ann saying with have MtM and because of the recent placement and phosphate sale, the funds to drill MtM to JORC?

I know which one I'd prefer and I also know which one will see the SP run unhindered!

The more I see from MNM, the more confident I am that we have invested in a company with solid management that, not only make smart and prudent commercial decisions in the best interests of the business, but also their SH's.

Cheers K