what do you want for nothing?, page-4

For sure jondoori, I hear you

But honestly, do you think the CEO of the company would have time to sit around and answer emails all day, or should they be out there drilling? Similarly, if they employed someone to answer emails I'd want to have that person's time and cost pumped into getting things moving, not writing to shareholders saying "nothing's changed, it's exactly like we said before, we're doing our best".

Here's how it goes: We demand them to put lines in the sand and set dates for when the Mesa contract will be signed etc etc. Then when those dates don't get met within a day or two everyone starts bemoaning the fact that "but they promised". "I'm selling" "they don't care about my options".

So it feels like they are damned if they inform us, because we will then hold it against them.

I think a lot of people have thoughts that these companies are masses of people with heaps of cash and time to spare. Like any business they don't. If if they did we'd be moaning about the fact they were wasting "our" money.

We have to realise they can't tell us the juicy stuff that we really all want to know, and unless you hold 5% of the float (which I don't) then I can't expect to have my emails answered. We are kept informed of the company's progress at the rate the company feels the best time they should do so.

Why such a feeling that the management is trying to stiff us? They hold shares too. Surely they want them to go up?

By all means give them brickbats if they don't perform but I don't think answering shareholder's barrage of emails constitutes anything to do with getting the goods out of the dirt.

But hey, I'm only one man with one opinion... :-) Good luck to us all.