Thank you (cikku) You are right, this was staged to try and...

Thank you (cikku) You are right, this was staged to try and divert attention from more important dealings and was stopped with enough shareholders telling this man to sit down and stop this nonsense, he wouldn't even let Richard answer the question put to him and kept interrupting when he was trying to answer, he was repeatedly told to shut up and let Richard answer until one member told the chair that he did not come to this meeting to waste his time listening to a bun fight and an attempt to blame someone over a blog written on this site.
For the record Richard was asked by the Companies lawyer if he did write the blog to which Richard replied he did and would stand by all it said.
There was some questions raised over the deal done with goldpride and a mater with related parties involving Foster and his Family, Questions were addressed to Mr Foster however DP interrupted and asserted that the family did not own goldpride and were only directors in name to the real owner Shane Finch therefore being no related parties between the family and a company Director, this will need further perusal for clarification. Some parts of the act covering this matter were quoted but the company lawyer stated that these matters could not be discussed as they referred to interpretation of legal facts and could not be discussed in this forum.
I did note the strategic placing of family and supporters about the room and assume that this was done to prevent any tape recording on the meeting, though there was no mention of this at the meeting, everybody there new that he had the numbers though most in attendance did vote against the three resolutions put before the meeting.
There was also a number of questions put in regards to numbers in the previous share issues and numbers in the financial statements. the man asking the questions stated that he had previously put these to the company in writing and had made numerous calls to a nil response from the company.
He was assured that if he put these questions in writing a response to each question would be forthcoming, these responses should be interesting reading.
In regards to the gold operation DP stated that the mine was now PAYING its way, a wonderful statement so again the next financial statement will be eagerly awaited.
Another question which raised some comments from the floor was the need to keep the operation at young ongoing, it was unbelievable that he stated that the Chinese had asked him to set up all requirements at young and that they would pay for it, this included a cook, all this is still going on, and god alone knows what they are doing however when questioned he admitted that his daughter was still allocated there and would be finishing at the end of the year, he was questioned on the need to continue these positions and who was paying, finally admitting that Jervois was paying the accounts for all this and the chinese would be reimbursing the Company for all costs involved,
I find this statement to be incredible in that the Chinese, who claim that jervois owes them in excess if $1,000,000 would be happy to come up with another 6/700,000 to compensate these expenses, it is more likely that he has continued this operation to keep his daughter employed and the true cost would be covered in the next statement under some other heading. he did not give a weekly/monthly estimate of these costs just saying the chinese would pay.
Sounds incredible what.
The question was also raised in regards to Directors not holding shares in the Company. This was asked to Dr Jensen on his re-nomination to the board and as he does not hold any shares what motivation was there for him to try and do the best for shareholders and take the Company forward also what role did he play on the board.
He stated that he was a consultant to the board and his expertise was of value. it was said that this was not in contention but why was it necessary for him to be on the board with no other interest on how the Company performs .
He said he had thought of this but thought there may be a conflict of interest in him just trying to raise the SP and not be truthfull in his statements, something I would have thought was just what shareholders wanted, a laughable response if it was not so serious to other shareholders.
On this matter DP stated that he had expressed similar concerns to board members in them not holding.
Again we will have to wait to see the outcome.
He was asked that if he does not come up with a partner in the next twelve months would he resign, for the past three years at least he has promised that a partner was close but for some reason when they do get close to closing something happens to cause a split thus nothing but broken promises again, this has happened on more than one occasion and there has been no detail to explain to shareholders what has gone wrong and the one time someone does mention some reasoning on a blog, some idiot wants to tear him apart and accuse him of being the reason the deal did not go forward.
His reply was that it would depend on his health and that he wanted to take his time in getting a partner to ensure it was the right partnership to take the Company forward.
Sorry this has been so long winded but I wanted to give some insight to shareholders who could not attend, into what happened.
I believe we have some news to look forward to and that the authorities are keeping a closer watch, hopefully we will get more fact and less spin. We should have given them something to think about, so hang in there and don't give up hope as we do still have a number of shareholders watching intently on all that happens.