aim resources...debentures issue., page-9

The only saving grace with debentures is of course that they assume better sp/market cap performance in the future.This would be a given IF

*they sign up the other offtakes

*Perkoa produces concentrate on time

The question being is what kind of ROCK SOLID assurances can Aim give any prospective takers of this debenture issue.With zinc not looking great,credit markets in turmoil and the company not impressing in the last half of 07 these brokers have their work cut out for them if Aim cant give such assurances.The problem being of course this is the fourth occasion Aim have been to the equity trough and pushed through an issue.They have all been of varying complexity with possibly the least risk for upside assigned to this issue,so perhaps a positive here.But ultimately the market has to believe any assurance Aim will give,but one now gets the feeling any major taker will want a signed assurance with a return of capital if not held to given recent company performance.

I still get a distinct feeling of overt positivity(I wont use the word Id like to as it might get me banned!)about the attitude of management as to how the company will perform on the basis of Perkoa development/production.It gives one a combined feeling of expectation with a sense of dread as to just whether Aim has treated this as a tiptoe through the Burkina Faso tulips.

The thing that worries me most is the sp performance as of late.Not because of the erosion of paper profits but the fact that the sp had established solid support at low 20s and rarely looked like it was going to break this support due to the solid buying,yet here we are now sub 15c looking at heading toward low teens.There is rarely a time the market gets it this wrong.So one wonders what the facts are behind this sp weakness.Whether the sp is being manipulated down or it is being sold down by those "in the know" about project problems or its simply a lack of market confidence(or a combination of the above)it would be nice to have some reasoning to it.

But then is the intention of the sp drop to prompt holders into asking the hard questions of Aim and at the very least motivate them to become more tranparent and accountable for adjusted timelines.It seems a very expensive way to get a point across if the case.

All I can say is good luck Viv.I dont know that you'll get too much joy espc with the questions on remuneration.Im not questioing Your judgement on including this line of questioning as it would be nice to get an "on the mark" answer,but from what Ive heard management thinks they are due these options and unfortunately no amount of enquiry is going to get them to,at the very least,hold off on the exercise of these options(which has already been done hasnt it)until they produce ore or sign up those offtakes.In fact I'm not quite sure why they called them PERFORMANCE options at all!

Oh well, I guess its just time to hide the head in the sand for a year or so and hope like hell these guys do have the necessary tecticular fortitude to carry this through.

Perhaps we as holders(with various forms of Aim equity)should realise just how far the fundamentals of Aim have come over the last year or so.But then perhaps the company should not give the market expectations that are too difficult to rise to.

d.