Slick239, well spotted. See, what I have been saying since...

Slick239, well spotted. See, what I have been saying since January?? It is there for all to see if the people in this forum wish to look instead of calling me names.

The period of the 'notice of deficiencies' was for lack of submissions in 2014, probably towards the latter part of H2 2014. Because in H1 2014 the company raised capital. Basically there was no money to do the work in late 2014 because if there was capital, the correct people would have been hired and the paperwork submitted in order to avoid the notice of deficiencies.. And as the emails allude and imply, there was no money to complete the request from the DNR from 30 Jan to the date of the email 30 March. If there was money to address the ‘notice of deficiencies’, the email from BLR to the DNR would have gone out during the first week of Feb responding to the notice and providing the pathway to a solution. all is my opinion based on public released documents.

I do agree that BLR should withdraw the application because Glasier will be able to cut through the red tape and get everything approved once WU merges with BLR. As per the auditors comments, BLR is not a going concern without a capital injection. And why have a black mark against BLR in the market when WU can do the submissions? IMO.

I have been saying for awhile that UBHM at HT is in trouble. But again, no one is listening.. Only calling names because they don’t know what is really going on. It is easier to post disparaging names than to do the hard analysis.

Cait