Have returned home with a few days to think about it. I left the...

Have returned home with a few days to think about it. I left the meeting quite negative because there were few answers being offered, but now I am feeling better. I wanted to know more about the nature of the disputes and how the company saw the various actions working out. They must have a view but they were not going to share it with us. The meeting was ruled by a strategy - it seemed to be " we are an aspiring uranium miner working hard to get into production - our jv partner is behaving in an inexplicable way and try as we might we have been unable to sort it out. We have asked the court to intervene out of desperation. We hope the court can help us sort it out asap so we can get on with producing "
Why are H behaving like this ? don't know !
Is the share price being fiddled ? don't know!
Did you see the article on the BB price fiddling ? We can't comment on BB behaviour !
Several times during the meeting the legal advice stepped in to shut discussion down - very keen that nothing was said to indicate any prejudgement. ???
I can only assume this is considered necessary from a legal point of view - Ags is as pure as the driven snow and has not done anything to entrap their jv partner.
They have perhaps entrapped their partner and we are in the middle of it - certainly H is squealing - the board wanted to say nothing that upset the plan and we must now wait and see if the trap produces the dinner. It is a very good resource with an optimum production target of 6m lb pa - capable of producing A$350m gross profit for H next year if they owned it outright and got on with it.
Good to meet you Harry - look forward to hearing what you think