hi ronmy last post was certainly not worthy of being moderated,...

hi ron

my last post was certainly not worthy of being moderated, it inferred nothing more or less than the preceding posts to which it responded.

anyhow, you seem to spring up in here around the time of cap raisings, so perhaps you could enlighten us....

is there any logic to a company who has paid over a year of consultation fees (to a firm whose job was to secure them an acquisition in the resource sector) suddenly using that firm to once again raise more capital, diluting the stock by almost 50%, without even having an announcement regarding a pending acquisition first?

isnt it normally done the other way round?

surely the long suffering shareholders deserve to know what it is that attracts the sophisticated investor to throw more money at an entity that has done nothing for over a year now?


are we to infer that the said acquisition is perhaps not so glamorous, and that maybe without a decent carrot to dangle in front of investors it is easier to just do a raising with smoke and mirrors instead?


anyhow, i have no interest in disrupting the flow of "coin" for you or any of the people whose company in here i have been aligned with for so long, so i will bother you all no longer.

but PLEASE, if someone insists on moderating every one of my posts, maybe they should consider moderating all the other posts in here that are "possibly defamatory"