Ann: Recommended Preferred Bidder for the Acquisition of Penouta, page-8

I totally agree with you on this one.

I'm all for exploring other opportunities, but if it comes at the cost of the core company asset Kvanefjeld, then no.

The great disrupter GBB has been claiming for months now that ETM needs to undertake field work this year at Kvanefjeld (he says 4m) to keep its licence. This has not been refuted as far as I can see by the company, so I don't think I'd be spending 6m on a failed mine in Spain (which no ETM investor had ever heard of until July 18th) if this proves to be the case.

Again, I hark back to IBG/SKM, which had a large quantified zinc/lead deposit in Greenland whose development qualified for an EXIM Loan if they could attract co-funding for the project. They failed to attract investment (despite the prospect of the EXIM Loan) and so they sold an asset potentially worth billions for a bit over a million. They are now back to square one as a pure 'specky' chasing gold.

Is this what we are seeing with ETM? Are they looking for an exit door from Greenland to concentrate on Spain, because 'the man on the ground' GBB also says he has heard rumours that ETM is looking to offload Kvanefjeld.

Most people look at the GBB's repetitive attacks on ETM in isolation and dismiss them immediately as bull shit, but when two separate but random themes coalesce, then I do tend to take more notice. i.e. his claims of the expenditure required for ETM to retain their licence and rumours of an ETM exit - because this is exactly what happened with IBG/SKM.

ETM shareholders didn't sign up for this, so I certainly hope not.