My response to that is that it’s definitely an i

My response to that is that it’s definitely an improvement in the way that you have summarized the proposed R/S. Whilst Dr. lodge has made it clearer to understand, there are still two problematic issues that shareholders have to consider. #1, we the shareholders still feel uneasy about not knowing the actual R/S ratio. There is a huge gap between 1:2 and 1:500. #2, yes it’s acknowledged that there is “solid experience among our management group”. That experience has been there all along and it has not resulted into any meaningful advancement of the company. What has changed to give shareholders confidence that going forward, management will make decisions that are for the benefit of all shareholders?

If we can pretend that we are the share price, here is what we would like the company to consider: 1) Get me up there to at least the level that we were at before the R/S was announced. Surely with all of the management experience among the group, you should know how to do this. If you want ideas, just read this forum. 2) Once you have accomplished #1, the R/S ratio should be at least 300% lower. Then you can re-articulate your proposal with a lower R/S ratio range, and we can talk. Thanks!!

Got to run…..