Ann: Riley Mine - Update Following Completion of First Shipment, page-159

Is it correct to say that the sale price of the shipment was struck some months ago ?

This price would have been agreed after receiving a quotation for shipping charges.

So at that time the nett value of the shipment would have been known.

It would have been known to be materially different to that forecast in the project plan. That difference was not deemed to be reportable to the ASX and Shareholders.

It would not have been reasonable to assume a better outcome on the second shipment.

Therefore . . .

1) why was the first sale proceeded with ?

2) why was the ship booked ?

3) why was the material variation in (maiden) shipment value not reported to the ASX ?

4) why was the mine not moth-balled months ago ?

5) why are national assets (the IO) given to other nations at less than cost ?

6) why would I expect this management to behave ethically in other projects ?

7) why am I still a holder ?

Whoops . . . I'm not (as of this am).

Have I got something wrong here ?

GLTAH