claws, tj, litchfieldLitchfield is right - posters' opinion...

claws, tj, litchfield

Litchfield is right - posters' opinion should be read on the "basis of DYOR" ie. take it or leave ! No one should be "belittled" for giving a different opinion and must be respected at all times !!! Thus, one can vote in red or green if agreeable, or otherwise

As for Kelp2 (not sure about NLR) - he bought in substantially below sub 1c (as confessed by him in HC previously) and heavily promoted MKY in HC (all his postings are all positives ie. not a balanced posting with pro's & con's). At those prices he is making a killing (thus, of course is should be positive) as opposed to sufferings of other long term shareholders who bought in during the days' of bonanza u grade promotion by AB(probably from 5c to 7c - in my case & fastdollar & others). But these two persons (NLR & Kelp2) seem to work together ie. ganging up to shoot down any posters of negative views and will not permit any negative postings - they should warned/bannned by HC for doing so.

I don't like this merger exercise due to ::

1. It has the "extreme dilution effect" to existing sharesholders that I don't like
2. Too expensive of a purchase price ie. the purchase at IPO price of 20c (MKY will issue 477m MKY shares in exchange for the 39.5m current issued shares in Callabonna Uranium - effectively at 20c ps)
3. To be acquired tenements required alot of exploration monies to be poured in just to identify uranium
4. This is not an advanced project (in market term, advanced project referred to tenements with a resources/reserves)
5. MKY has lost control of the company to the vendors
6. IPO caused approx. $1m in expenses to float a new company in the ASX - in this regards why are we paying the vendor such a high price of 20c - we should be paying "Seek Capital" pricings
7. Deal yet to be finalised and MKY sp is already $22m (based on finalisation of the deal)
8. Future burnt cash rate will be very high doing explorations works & paying admin expenses

Not good thing coming out of this deal is that we have a cornerstone shareholder (SE Energy). The tenements of the vendor appears interesting but requires lots of monies to even identify existence of U, let alone of any feasible grades & resources. Commitment of future investors' funds ($1.1m & $2m) is good for MKY.

Lastly, I obversed on Friday, someone was pumping MKY sp and he/she (two of them ie. 2m & 1 m shares buying) were lining up behind other buyers and when come to their turns in line to buy, they just disappeared ! PLus, they loaded up heavily on the buy side that if you want to buy - you must pay the market price (the sellers price). Such, action is viewed as dumping IMO !

I also strongly disagreed with Kelp2 as he viewed MKY of low M Cap - this is not the case


DYOR - IMO

Good luck everyone.

AoA