Had a fairly extensive conversation with Brian Robertson today. Kind enough to speak with me before a meeting to which he was headed. I told him that I was speaking for people who were concerned about the PR that was issued. Although we both agreed that the verbiage issue was unfortunate and that he was concerned enough to make sure something like this would not happen again, my own concern was more with the substance of the PR or rather what it did not say.
I indicated that many of us invested in and remained shareholders because of our perception that there was a real substantive business plan, particularly with respect to the propsects in Cambodia. I went over the information that I had accumulated and specifically did NOT ask him to confirm or deny anything. He is very knowledgeable about not disclosing any information to a phone caller and I always ask CEO's NOT to disclose anything to me that would in any way consist of information that is not public. I do tell them my particular perception and the information that I have accumulated on my own. I do not ask for confirmation or denial of any facts.
The importance here is that with the poorly (IMO) worded PR, the natural inclination is to look at each word. The next step was for many of us to think that somehow the Cambodian ventures are either abandoned or non-existent.
Further, I gave my own opinion with respect to former "competitor" CMBV, which suddenly changed its business plan from Cambodian gold miner, to casino operator to bird flu vaccine company. My obvious opinion is probably shared by others. Unfortunately, there is a risk that the company could be painted by the same broad brush, particularly by any "basher" that wishes to use the language problem and the fact that nothing is really mentioned about Cambodia in the PR.
OK - so I am very verbose and I wanted to get my concerns across to him. He was very receptive, or at least he didn't hang up after getting suggestions from a "know it all" shareholder. He is very aware of CMBV. He asked me to compare the backgrounds of people and the details of business plans. I said I didn't need to do that as Rick and others have already convinced me to the extent that I currently do not, any longer, own shares in CMBV but I do own shares in IPMG.
In any event, I specifically asked if the PR did or was meant to indicate anything negating progress in Cambodia. His answer was that it did not. He stated that it was intended to show that they have "something else," that they are not just a Cambodian and far east gold mining venture.
Again, he would not give me details and I told him I was not looking for details. I suggested that some follow-up PR's indicating progress, whatever it is, might be appropriate in light of the unfortunate language in the prior PR. He thanked me for my sugestions and indicated he would consider them. He stated he has turned down requests from other shareholders that he actively promote and spend our shares promoting. I told him I agreed with that and prefer to place my own larger investments with companies that do not give away shares for mere promotion. I told him I was NOT requesting this but only that a progress report with respect to Cambodia, whatever that progress is, would be one way to bolster a strong shareholder base.
Other specific information. He has been requested to provide free Level 2 quotes on pinksheets.com and, again, would not give me a specific answer. I took that as being something that wouild likely happen. We both agreed that it is relatively cheap PR and helps foster the shareholder base, particularly for smaller shareholders.
O/s remains at 325 million, figures I've had since I first started researching this. Maximum, that is maximum, freely traded shares, "float," is at most 65 million shares. Remaining shares are restricted and/or escrowed. He indicated that he shared my concerns about dilution.
All in all, I felt it was a good conversation. I don't recommend that others do the same thing as I did, at least not now. It's best that 1 or 2 shareholders call with detailed questions or suggestions. I know Rick has been successful. It's good to keep the lines of communication open but also important not to overwhelm CEO's with repetitive requests.
My conversation was about 1/2 hour and I do believe that there is no further information to be obtained today. |
