The shares in escrow were part of the original acquisition / IPO...

The shares in escrow were part of the original acquisition / IPO float at 25 cents in Feb 2008 - this was part of the price to purchase the assets from the Shumways and it has been on the website and in announcements for years. Those shares were required to be held in escrow for 2 years by the ASX.

Re the underwriting, there has been a lot of "theorising" on Hot Copper.

Simple fact is that Cunninghams agreed to fully underwrite the $22 million, they did not perform and White Canyon had a decision to make: either to sue them or to settle and achieve further funds from Cunninghams as part of the settlement as they have announced.

White Canyon took the commercial approach, which I believe is in the best interests of the company and shareholders, to settle. Cunninghams do not have $ 22 million so litigation would be pointless and distracting for the company in its focus on expanding its mining operations and new acqusitions. Litigation (because of its distracting effect) would be the best recipe for reducing the price in my opinion.

White Canyon has no control over Cunninghams - this is no different to any commercial arrangement in which a company relies on its contracts to be be performed.

Yes, it is very frustrating, yes option holders and shareholders must feel upset, but at the end of the day White Canyon would want its underwriting contract to be performed just as much as any investor would - that must be so.

Concerns about the ability of Greece, Spain and Portugal to repay their sovereign debt which caused substantial jitters and sell offs in worldwide markets in the week before options close also did not help with raising funds.

The fundamentals have not changed and in my opinion this company has a bright future. It has an excellent mining team and an excellent mining operation. It is now able to expand its investor base in North America. It is one of only 3 ASX listed pure uranium producers (the others being ERA and Paladin). It has huge upside for those with a 12 month investment plan. It is not a stock for day traders.

In my opinion it will do well and I still hold. There is no issue at all with "director trust". The issue is with Cunninghams and their failure to perform.

Call the company ...thats what I did Friday pm and thats how it is.

And remember - this could have happened to BHP. No company has any iron clad guarantee that its capital raisings will be successful. It is part of the commercial risk in investing in any company, as "unpalatable" as that might seem. But it is the reality.

Cheers

glow