Not sure that I should bother to answer your post there...

Not sure that I should bother to answer your post there spector.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ! Not sure at all really. Judging by some of your throw away comments in your post I doubt that you are really interested in getting a substantial response.

Let's just say that you can rule Mt C. out of this picture IMHO. Don't rule it out completely but I would hazard a guess that it is not really of any significance for the negotiations with the Chinese.

Now if you were genuinely interested in keeping up with the play so far as RAU is concerned then you should know what JK has hinted at or indicated in the past about what the Chinese were coming here to look at.

As an example here is an extract from the March Quarterly Report 2007 :
"The Company has supplied a sample of antimony concentrate from the Northcote Project to a Chinese
smelting company for testwork. The smelting company was very pleased with the quality of the concentrate
and has expressed interest in securing a contract for any antimony concentrate that the Company can
produce. The same group has expressed interest in any tungsten resources that the Company might be able
to develop on its 100%-owned ground in FNQ. Further discussions were also held during the Quarter with a
representative of a Chinese investment company that had expressed interest in the Company’s projects."

Then on December 12, 2007 the announcement following the Chinese delegation visit :
"The delegation was particularly interested in the Company’s gold projects in Far North
Queensland and in the Burraga Copper Project. This is an excellent complement for the Malaysian
Chinese investors who have predominantly invested in the Company because of the tungsten
projects."

Then the most recent announcement about the second visit :
"During the delegation’s initial visit in December it viewed the Company’s Far North Queensland
projects. On this visit the delegation viewed the Company’s 75%-owned Burraga Base Metals
Project."

So there is no great mystery in what they have been shown or at least in what we have been told they were shown. Were they shown something else. Maybe but I doubt it.

Now all that information is freely accessible and does not take to long to source unless you prefer someone else to do your digging for you.

Perhaps you could be kind enough to do something in return. You make a claim about these Malaysians who sold up after getting their shares.
Would you kindly find the names of the the investors who sold and how many shares they each sold and whether they still retain any of their shares.

Now some 60 million shares were allocated to the PREDOMINATELY Malaysian investors. I have had a look at the Dec Quart 2007 report and the list of the top 20 shareholders. There are 4 names there with distinctly a Chinese flavour including POSSIBLY that of the leading man who introduced the investors. No guarantee that the other 3 are part of that group but it is probably not a bad guess. The list includes
Mr Yew Meng Chay 12,000,000 1.81%
Mr Wee Lock Ho 8,700,000 1.31%
Dato Tien Seng Law 5,000,000 0.75%
Mr Yi Ming Tan 4,129,006 0.62%

So I reckon that accounts for about 30 million of them if I am correct in thinking that they are some of the PREDOMINANTLY Malaysian Chinese.
And if some of the group did sell off after a few months who could blame them. They are probably very astute and could see that the sudden rise in price of RAU shares might also lead to a sudden drop.
They may reappear in the next listing of top 20 shareholders with an even bigger stake.

There that is more than you deserve of my time and effort spector.