prove me wrong!

Well, I've been an on-the-side watcher of this stock for many a years now, and I can honestly say I am still surprised by the frequency of relatively unfounded and just plain silly comments made on this company. (Especially in regards to "watch out for an announcement" comments). I do not hold any personal grudge with MUL, but only it's performance (lack off) and it's constant Money printing business.

But perhaps, times are a-changing, and this is where I would like to get some comments from some members. Based on real numbers, could this company still trully deliver?

Here are some observations that are trully curious to me:

1. Do you notice, and I do plead that you go back and read past announcements (especially about the General meetings held), that there are SO MANY shares issued at every opportunity? Do you realise that MUL now has about 1.1Billion shares issued? Compare that to someone like Coles Myer, that has about 1.2Billion..

Some may say it's not a fair comment, because, etc.etc.etc...however, as shareholders, do you not get upset/concerned for the loss of shareholder value? Net Profit is still in the negative! EPS is about negative 2.5c. Just to earn about 1c per share, the company would need to make a profit of about 11.4Million. Is that even achievable with how MUL is operating? Just how far is that really?

(side note. Just read another announcement dated on the 10th of Feb for a further issue of 1Million shares to 'someone' for consultation. does this mean they can't really afford to pay and have to print money with shares? oh well, that's another 1Mil that will be on the sell side of the Market Depth soon!)

2. I still laugh at the Microsoft connection that is made with MUL. I suppose it adds a nice branding feeling to it all. About 5 years ago, it was a big news item that Paul Allen, the co-founder of microsoft was a big investor. (never mind the fact that he was simply good buddies with the CEOs and just had too much money to keep in the bank). And I remember hearing that there were other big name people who were -issued- shares, and some sold it all as soon as they got them at the expense of all other shareholders.

The recent Clinton Starr sell off. Come on people. Think clearly. He is selling now, as there is nowhere else for the stock to go. Even if it does shoot up, is it because of well founded reasons? When he first had 50Mil in MUL, his shareholding was worth 7.51%! Recently, it would only have been diluted to about 4.3%. I'd say that's why he's getting out!

Seriously shareholders...am I that wrong? Or is this simply a High Risk stock that is fueled by the chat forums and it should be accepted as such?