Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Anzex -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CLK who wrote (201)	11/19/1998 8:54:00 PM
From: D. W.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 253

To All: November 18, 1998 Brisbane Australia Mr. Hoult's rebuttal to the Board Announcement of November 16, 1998 regarding his dismissal as CEO & President I have been removed as CEO and President. However, I intend to reinstate my position in the immediate future. It is true that I was repeatedly in opposition to the other board members, but when you have read this you can make your own assessment of the true position without the distortion and fabrications outlined in the directors statement of November 16. The facts speak for themselves: I directly and indirectly control in excess of 4 million shares in the company. I have never sold a share and have at all times had the interests of the company and its stockholders foremost. Just ask yourselves the question: "Would Mr. Hoult set out to destroy the very company he created and in which he has such a strategic interest?" And now let me turn to the other board members, the three people responsible for my dismissal – Jim Kermeen, Tony Naldrett and John Robins. Jim Kermeen is the new President and holds himself out to be concerned about the company. Why then did Mr. Kermeen dump his Anzex stock at prices well above current levels? Similarly, Mr. Robins is long gone as a stockholder. Obviously, Mr. Robins has no other consideration than his own personal gain. Mr. Robins also has a glaring conflict of interest in that he is a director of a company that applied for the exploration rights to all the ground surrounding the Longwoods project in New Zealand. Mr. Robins never disclosed that fact to the Anzex board and when confronted with it refused to acknowledge a conflict of interest or to resign from one or the other company! Yes, these two gentlemen certainly have your interests at heart, don't they?? And let's move on to Professor Tony Naldrett, an acknowledged authority on the genesis of platinum deposits worldwide. I would point out that Naldrett is a retired university academic and scientist of high repute. However, he is not an exploration geologist and to my knowledge has never been solely responsible for the conduct of an exploration program. Naldrett accepted an appointment to the board of Anzex and insisted he assume control of the Longwoods exploration program. He spent time in NZ looking at the Longwoods and discussing and approving the exploration program put forward by the then field geologist in charge of the program. The computer designed drilling program was duly commenced with Naldrett's approval and general overall control. I visited the Longwoods during the drilling of DDH1 and noted the hole was being drilled 180 degrees to its planned direction – that is in the opposite direction to the one intended. At that time, I took the decision to override Naldrett and threw out the computer program on which the drill holes were being modeled. I instructed the field geologist to return to a conventional geology program. Naldrett visited the Longwoods on completion of DDH1 and severely criticised my actions in a communication to the other board members. I then returned to NZ and dismissed the project geologist. At that stage DDH2 was already well underway. My actions have since been vindicated as both DDH1 and DDH2 have proven to be invalid holes. I appointed Philip Ford, a highly experienced geologist with particular expertise in the geology of NZ, to redesign the program. Naldrett subsequently admitted at a board meeting in Vancouver on 17 August, 1998 that the previous project geologist I had dismissed was an "unmitigated disaster." In view of the fact that he, Naldrett, was overall director of the program I made it very clear that he should include himself in the same classification. I did not consider the waste of $450,000 of shareholders funds was a matter to be taken lightly nor blamed on the dismissed geologist. Naldrett had after all, insisted on being in charge of the program. Ford shut down the program until he was able to generate valid geological and geophysical data. He sited DDH3, the hole which has proven beyond doubt the Longwoods does host stratiform platiniferous horizons. This is the result that could have been achieved in DDH1 if the program had been under competent guidance and control. Ford sited DDH4, which is presently drilling ahead at 260 metres. Naldrett has not visited the Longwoods since the completion of DDH1 nor has he made any contribution whatsoever to the siting of DDH3 and DDH4. The claim that I have opposed his visits to the Longwoods is erroneous. However, I have made it clear I think his visits are irrelevant to the success of the program. The whole board, including Naldrett, have expressed their complete confidence in Ford and the direction of the program under his control. It has been claimed I withheld information from the board and therefore shareholders. Once again let's look at the facts. Anzex commenced drilling DDH1 in May. The company made news releases on June 8, July 7, and August 24. It should be noted the board made the decision to only make a comprehensive announcement at the termination of the initial three-hole program. This decision was never challenged at any board meeting. At a board meeting on August 17 Naldrett insisted he move back into overall control by chairing a "technical committee." He was to report directly to the board and therefore to stockholders. I was very vocal in my opposition, but for the sake of harmony, finally agreed to his demand. It is interesting to note that Naldrett did not make a single report to the board from that date until November 3 – nearly thee months. And that news release was only forthcoming after I had attempted to make an announcement to shareholders dated November 2. The opposing board members blocked my release and called a halt to trading prior to Naldrett's release of November 3. Their argument was stockholders would be more impressed with Naldrett's name on the release. The stock in fact, went down. Naldrett has stated his consulting services will not be available should I remove the directors opposing me. I really have no comment to make on that other than to refer stockholders to Naldrett's description of the previous project geologist as being an "unmitigated disaster." I originally insisted Naldrett inspect the Longwoods before accepting a board position. I was only interested in his technical, rather than promotional attributes. He confirmed the Longwoods geology had the potential to contain a major platinum discovery – a prediction he was eminently qualified to make. It soon became clear to me following his assumption of the role of exploration director that he was stepping outside his sphere of expertise and into one of management. Naldrett had confirmed the Longwoods potential. That was his sole brief. I have already advised Naldrett that in view of his performance to date he should remove himself from the board immediately. Naldrett already totally defers to Ford as the more informed geologist on the Longwoods. Why does the company need a $1000 per day consultant to confirm what Ford is already telling the directors and Naldrett is totally in agreement with? How can Kermeen and Robins pretend to represent the stockholders and express concern when they have already dumped their stock and therefore dumped you as stockholders? Which brings me to the totally false and misleading statement the opposing board members attribute to Pacific International Securities – the company's sponsoring brokers. PI has never stated nor have they ever indicated they would withdraw sponsorship if the company was to remain under my overall direction as CEO or President. PI has indeed expressed concern and wants to see the current conflict resolved. They hold the interests of the company and its stockholders paramount. The Longwoods program is probably the most important new platinum province anywhere in the world today. Whether it proves to be commercial remains to be seen. However, Phil Ford has verified the geological model long indicated by a succession of companies and geologists, but never proven until now. It is of vital importance that Anzex direct its entire attention to the Longwoods and I intend to ensure that direction does not waiver. I will remove Naldrett, Kermeen and Robins at either the Annual General Meeting that is set down for December 21 or at an Extraordinary General Meeting which I will call if any attempt is made to delay the AGM. The opposing directors are on notice that in the face of overwhelming numerical opposition --- and support for my stand is also derived from a number of Vancouver and Toronto brokers who have clients heavily invested in the company – I will take whatever action to recover damages personally against each of Naldrett, Kermeen and Robins on behalf of the company. Naldrett acknowledges my position through my stockholding is unassailable. Why is he putting the company to the expense of fighting me? Has it anything to do with fees both he and Kermeen will be demanding, and possible "golden handshakes" they will derive for themselves in the interim? I think stockholders and the sponsoring brokers have every reason to be concerned. D.R.Hoult Director No stock exchange has reviewed or approved the content of this news release Comments ? D.W.