Ann: Amended Quarterly Activities Report , page-25

UM
I found it funny to.

The largish shareholders have enough experience to know what they are getting themselves into as much as I, yourself and others. Surely PB and co have been objective up to now. The ups and downs of any company are always happening. The concerns that you have expressed are very well documented and can assure you that they haven't always been objective, (ex) but co validated.

I agree with you that a little forum like this one would not have dragged down the SP but there has been some bragging.

For the actual worth of the company the SP, IMO, should be higher if not for the speculative games that have been played around stopping the SP from getting higher, in fact going back and looking at the % movements the compass has strayed away decisively with purpose especially after good news ( not that it affects me as I have accumulated and gained as of because )

I am a long term holder as like many am interested in seeing the DFS completed, ( though the industry track record for delivering against feasibility study expectations is not good. Lawrance (1997) reports that:
There is strong evidence that, at least for major projects, there is an unwelcome record of failure (Morris and Hough, 1986, p 5). The World Bank (1978) lists 109 operations of which a quarter had cost overruns of 25 per cent or more, one-tenth had cost overruns of 50 per cent or more. Approximately half had time overruns of 25 per cent or more and approximately one-third had time and cost overruns of 50 per cent ) so once that goal is reached, technically finance should follow as the success of the project will depend upon the assumptions and decisions in the feasibility study and the ability and empowerment of the development team.

Six to nine months for the DFS is nothing although it has taken a while.

Igilug