10.2% yeesh ! Worse than I had thought anyway. If that had been...

10.2% yeesh ! Worse than I had thought anyway. If that had been left to be sold on market then we would more than likely have seen a major drop. I'd say the ANZ's receivers are being very co-operative because they stand to get a far better price off the market through some pre-aranged deal to sell the lot to one or a few parties.

We are now faced with the situation so should try to look for the best solution and focus on some of the positives

1. Selling a substantial chunk is possibly more marketable ? and could be more attractive an option to a decent third party investor. Remember, as the resigter stands it is a fairly impenetrable fortress as far as third party predators are and this opens the door slightly.

2. The Canadian factor - as noted in previous posts. If it goes to the Canadians = greater TSX liquidity and exposure over there.

3. If it had been a smaller parcel they may have been content to let it go through the market - so, subject to arrangements agreed this may in fact see the share price fall far less than it otherwise would have if a smaller parcel had been left to pass through at market.

NM's punishment is two fold - financial obviously and reputational secondly. If he had been aware of the t's and c's and put his entire stake at risk in full cognisance of the additional risks that posed to the company in general then that is not great and does not do much for me personally in terms of my confidence in his judgement. I would say prima facie its not a good look for NM and he will be as aware of that as anyone on this forum.

Fact is that, in this day and age of shareholder activism and heightened scrutiny, directors are held far more accountable for their actions. NM, as all professional directors, will be aware of this. You can no longer expect to act with impunity or acquiesce to or ignore the broader consequences of your actions when you are a director of a publicly listed company. You need to run a tidy shop and generally err on the side of caution in your personal dealings as they do or may relate directly to the company. That is the reality for directors today and to do otherwise leaves you exposed to challenge for failure to discharge you statutory duties.

Having said all of that - as I said before - we should not be too quick to act as judge and jury and hang NM until all facts come to light - assumption is the mother of all failure and could leave us looking silly on that count. No one wins if NM has failed in his duties as a director or acted recklessly - BMN, you or me as shareholders and least of all NM himself. I doubt this will have endeared him to the rest of the board either.

Ultimately BMN will survive this hiccup and we can get on with the business of moving towards U production.