RE: AGM Presentation on websiteJohnEStromJr,
In my opinion there is no more important topic than LBE converting their nickel reserves to cash as efficiently and quickly as possible.
Discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the company being controlled by a 51% shareholder may make for an interesting conversation, but it will not alter reality. Under the circumstances at the time that Jilin Jien became involved, it was not unreasonable that they obtain absolute control of LBE. A shareholder at the time, was faced with his investment becoming worthless or being involved in a company that was controlled by the only investor willing to inject the funds required for the survival of the company. At the time, dilution was a non-issue - there is no greater dilution than bankruptcy. It was also not unreasonable that Jilin Jien negotiate terms that insured their absolute control, should LBE at some point raise additional capital equity. It has been indicated that the goals of the company are to retire the debt to Jilin Jien, and begin redemption of the preferred shares. JJ have indicated publicly, they are in agreement with this plan. Proceeding with this, is in my opinion, in the best interest of the minority shareholders. If this can be achieved, it means that the "rescue" was achieved with minimum dilution.
Jilin Jien have agreed to this plan, and if and when share redemption commences, it will significantly reduce the market's concerns in having a 51% controlling shareholder. As far as convincing Jilin Jien that they should give up control so that the "excitement to invest" can be restored, we must remember that this company was the only one excited to invest in an equity placement and loans in the dark days. Their motive is profit and returns on this investment for their shareholders. Their only reason for reducing their investment would be to increase their returns. As a shareholder, I hope that they decide that the best return is to maintain their LBE position - because what's good for them as a shareholder will be good for me as a shareholder.
I would have preferred seeing economic times not interfere, and see LBE reach its goals on the limited capital it had employed just prior to the global collapse. Such was not to be, and out of the scenarios that could have resulted, I feel fortunate with the alternative that was arranged. I would much rather be involved in the LBE ownership structure, than that prevalent in a number of small cap companies. There are a number of public companies, where the shares are widely held and there is no major shareholder with effective or absolute control. Poor management, executive greed and disregard for the shareholder can run rampant in these companies. I prefer the style of management that Gary Nash brought to this company, and I like the idea that the controlling shareholder apparently likes this management also. I'm very comfortable with the status quo, and pleased that the company is once again able to concentrate on growing its mining business. That's the important topic to me - if that's looked after all the shareholders will benefit.