hartleys report , page-23

kimbo252: Thanks for your thoughts. But, frankly speaking, I do not see your "another option" as really feasible.
In my personal view, FAR EITHER has
1) Really interested party/parties with which they are negotiating still some details, obviously.
IN this case, a deal will be signed within this year's deadline or FAR gets the kind of "positive/convincing" assurances that a deal will be signed sometime in early 2010 and hence FAR will pay that $ 5.0 mio. "option"/renewal fee (this "option scenario" has never been - at least to my knowledge - been revealed to the shareholder other than now via the Hartley's report, which is a bit strange indeed?!)
OR
2) There are NO really interested party/parties willing to sign on any dotted lines in spite of FAR's efforts during the past 12 months.
Naturally, in this case it would be best for FAR to just walk away.
Personally, I still believe that FAR will be able to announce a JV partner within the current deadline period. Time will tell as usual and comments welcome.
wasa