CKIt not standard practice to provide zero information about the...

CK

It not standard practice to provide zero information about the costs and activities of the subsidiary, especially when that subsidiarity is virtually 90% of the controlling companies activity. Normal practice (under these circumstances) would to provide some form of supplementary advise or statement as to the costs the company was incurring. The market has no idea how this money is being spent and whether its related to the Bolivian project or not..........it would fairly painless for the company to release to the market a statement of costs on the project

My point is that this company has a history of poorly informing the market.....next thing we know JK will turn up running the subsidiary with inappropriate costs associated with the project

My other point is that no one on this thread will touch is that Burraga is a related party transaction designed to allocate a disproportionate profit to the lender (Burraga Copper). RAU management should release the details of this deal to the market including the reasons it was transacted in the fashion it was completed