Rick and Chair-face have covered much ground. I won’t address...

Rick and Chair-face have covered much ground. I won’t address each item separately but just add a few related points off the top of my head too.

I am not a buddy of Luke Schuss. Meeting up by chance in a public mining gathering and exchanging experiences and being buddies are two different things.

(All the following is my opinion, of course.)

A mineral license is a “right to explore/mine”, justlike a driver’s license. If you don’t renew it, it expires automatically. Adios!Sayonara! Dasvidaniya!

When the claim(s) that cover the Cancet deposit expireI will apply for them at the appointed hour. Or I will buy shares in thecompany that wins them, as soon as the opening bell sounds.

If, say, the management of MTC have a plan to increasetheir (proportion) of equity (at the expense of existing shareholders) thenthey are following a perfect recipe. Its legal, eh!!!??The lawsuit calls for, among other things, a cashpenalty of $10,000,000. When I first read it, and still now, I think that thisis the item that will cause any judge to decide in favour of MTC. First of all,does the delay of payment (for just about any reason) justify a cash penalty of$10,000,000? On top of getting the lithium deposit (the existence of which wasNOT known when the property deal was signed), back, what is the penalty for? Forloss of enjoyment of life? For psychological damage?

In my strong opinion, and despite the unfortunate actionsof the defendants, the plaintiffs may have fatally damaged their case bydemanding the $10,000,000. Why? Simply because they (and a judge) should know quite well that a junior explorer (and specifically MTC) that has no earnings will never be able to pay that amount. Demanding the $10,000,000, in my opinion, could very well kill the company as they should know that MTC can’t raise that money. So then, what is the real purpose of adding the $10,000,000 as punishment? I wouldn't think its for loss of enjoyment of life.

Which brings me full circle. If the company ceases to exist, the claims will naturally expire. In my opinion, perhaps the plaintiff has shot himself in the foot.

I believe that whatever the legal decision, it will be“all or nothing”. There won’t be any partial awards. This case is pretty simple, so to speak. With a simple judgement to me made.

I have no idea why the rebate is taking so long. Infact I have asked the mines department about MTC specifically but the only“answer” I have received are links to Quebec government sites explaining the rebateprogram.

Perhaps Alain Berclez, after becoming familiar withthe inner workings of MTC decided that he did not want to be associated withthe company any more. So in this case he just left, perhaps leaving any dirtylaundry (if any) as he found it. He may just be bursting to tell his story but, alas, likely never will. He’ll just get on with his life and not look back.

We can’t know if the current directors will simplywait until the coffers are bone dry then let the company get delisted then diea natural death. They will have still benefited from their wages and perks ofthe past years. Yes, I have thought about the large quantity of shares that they will have sacrificed. But they can make those back in their next venture, whatever that may be.

Now, with regards to dilution, that is a word thatonly affects existing shareholders and/or shareholders who are not invited toparticipate in the next round of financing. If you bought 100,000 shares at $0.25, tough luck for you! And notwithstanding any (potential) accounts payable, if you are invited to participate in a cleaned-up MTC at, say, one cent you may very well see the upside. (A rollback / share consolidation has no effect in this equation; in itself it will not change the market cap (Stockmarket 101)). The losers will be those who have shares today. The winners will be those who get in on the next financing.

Let me rephrase myself. The losers will be those who bought shares far above 2 cents. Those who have recently bought for 2 cents-ish may do just fine.

We can’t know (unless they tell us, of course) howmuch honest time the board has put into the company for the wages they havetaken. This is a fact of life and the shareholders simply have to accept theirlumps. Or do something about it.

Is MTC a good investment? Only the board knows. Only the board knows if they want to revive the company or let it die. I can clearly see how they could decide to do either. Or they may wait for the day in court to be announced by B.C. Courts.