Ive got a lot and happy to flex some muscle in a combined...

Ive got a lot and happy to flex some muscle in a combined letter, but still considering voting yes or no.

Activists are great when they express anger and demand a response, but when they go fiddling in board rooms they are down right dangerous.

I reject the notion to ask for extra directors, till we have the cash flow to cover a bigger pool of directors.

I reject the notion to block any capital raising as it could be catostrophic to the companies future chances of raising capital, through dilution or debt. It would be more inclined to go straight to institutions if it thought it had a rebel group of shareholders.

But i 100% support a letter drafted by someone in this forum expressing disappointment at the timing of the last cap raising. The letter should also express delight and thanks for the things that have been done brilliantly.

I would also add that this forum is about the 2nd best publicity AAM has and you guys quickly need to deal with this and move on or you may be inadvertaintly doing more damage to the sp then what your accusing JW of through the dilution (especially on R5).

Next week is another very exciting week for AAM with a likely gold pour indicated by the md. A focus on that as of monday would serve the company far better then too much focus on this.

I someone quickly draft a polite letter, expressing thanks and then frustration at the timing and style of dilution. Tell him our combined shareholder size who are dis-satisfied, tell him many will vote no this time through proxies , while others will give him one more chance to get it right. Tell him we want a focus on shareholders in future dilution if any and leave it at that.

This could all be wrapped up today (Sat) and then we can focus on the real issue that will affect sp more then any other, which is the gold pour this week.