From a neutral point of view (despite being a shareholder) i.e I...

From a neutral point of view (despite being a shareholder) i.e I am playing devils advocate, issues I believe need to be considered are as follows:

1) Recent Placement: placement sounds fantastic. But we all know that these deals aren't always what they seem... My big issue with the placement (despite it sounding fantastic, i.e. exercisable once the sp hits at least AUD$0.75c) is why Falco? Who is Falco, what do they offer to us? And perhaps the biggest issue for me, is why haven't we been informed properly? I really want to know who Falco is, and how this arrangement is going to help us. Behind closed doors, what do Falco offer ahead of other PR/shareholder relations consultants around...?

2) Recent announcements: All announcements of late (IMO) have exhibited an element of amateurish behaviour. The Australian newspaper (of all newspapers, this is one I'd prefer to remain in the good books of) published an article regarding the 'tardy disclosure of director interests' on 4 July 2008 by the WME board. Hmmmmmm.... For a board which feels it possesses the make-up of something more than just an explorer, this really doesn't help their cause.

3) Technical Director acting as CEO: how long has this now been the case? For me, particularly when you have a technical director of the ilk of Leon Reisgys, why has a competent, permanent replacement CEO not been found? I agree with the requisitioner ('Mr Nikolaenko') that this could perhaps be affecting Leon's ultimate effectiveness.

4) Director interests: Prior to the lodgement of the recent 3Y's and 3X's, it appears that the directors have had no direct interest in the coy (aside from these director options). When you look at the emergence of similar coy's and the stakes held by board members (Mr Crabb and Mr Borshoff of PDN as only one example), what exactly is it that is holding these board members from putting their 'money where their mouths are' and INVESTING in the company like I and all of you have done!?

5) Mr Nikolaenko's 'chequered history': Hmmmm, perhaps a very interesting topic. Who nominated Mr Johnston and Mr Semmens (secretary)? Mr Johnston used to be on the board of Magna Mining (the coy now embroiled in legal proceedings in Namibia) and current WME sectretary (Mr Semmens) is the current secretary for MAN. Enough said here.

Given the above, and for me as a long, long term holder, it is up to the current board to prove to me why exactly someone like Mr Nikolaenko, does not have the right to question the effectiveness of the current board. If only I happened to hold >5% of the share capital, I may have considered similar actions 12 months ago (when additional capital could have been raised at circa 30-44c, a sore spot for me). Imagine if C4 had held more than 5%.... we may have had Donald Duck and Marvin the Martian as Directors given his disenchantment with the SP movements. This is why the law allows for substantial holders to make these requests - they only want to maximise the value of their own investment (as do I).

Anyway, I know I am a new poster, but do not think this is any indicator of my involvement in the coy. I am certainly not a s/h that will sway votes in anyway in August, but my investment in this coy represents a big portion of what I currently have invested in the share market as a whole, and I would really like to see my gamble pay off.

We are all capable of making our own decisions re share investments (my pet hate being those who blame others for wrong 'hot tips'). My views above are purely for discussion purposes only. My proxy form is already filled out. Do not let my opinions affect your own decisions.

I know SP movement is not the only true indicator of progress, but for me, it is the lack of substantial interest in the coy that suggests the current board composition does not 'have what it takes'.

I hope the best for my investment, and all holders. Please ensure this asset is maximised for it's highest and best use.

Interesting times.

Kind regards

Lilly