Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Mart Resources Inc MAUXF



OTCPK:MAUXF - Post by User

Post by mjh9413on Mar 10, 2016 10:15am
238 Views
Post# 24643123

Letter to Board

Letter to BoardMaybe some of the answers are out there but I, for one, am totally peeved at the way the Board has considered shareholders for at least the past year and wanted to get it off my chest even at this late stage of MMT's probable demise. I have asked them previously but have never got a response.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MART RESOURCES
 
"It is difficult to know where to begin when there is apparently so much underlying fact that has not been revealed to shareholders. I ask the Board to forgive and correct any assumptions or errors of fact in the following but here are specific matters I otherwise ask the Board to respond to, even though we might appear to be at a late stage of a proposed takeover by San Leon (SL).
First, why have shareholders not been given the basic right to a detailed, written Fairness Opinion on the said offer from SL and relied solely on such an Opinion expressed verbally to the Board or some of its Members?
Why would the Board feel that a Fairness Opinion could be valid when it recently had a superior offer (well in excess of the SL proposal) which also had a Fairness Opinion?
Another matter involves the Moratorium placed upon the reimbursement arrangements set out in the Management Services Agreement (MSA) between Mart and its original co-venturers. Why did the Board not oppose such imposition when apparently mandated as a Condition by the Nigerian Bank which is not a party to that MSA?  I understand that initial loans from the Bank were secured by the assets of Mart Umusadege Resources Nigeria Limited but, even if such is the case, such a Moratorium is even more intriguing when one considers that it has most assuredly weakened the financial position of Mart over the past year, when one would think that a Bank Lender would wish to see the opposite!
It appears that Mart has not and is not receiving any financial benefit from its interests in either OML 18 (which is one reason Mart’s debt position to the Bank) or the Umugini Pipeline. Again, this is made more intriguing when SL has been offered a ‘sweep’ of OML 18 income to offset certain of its costs related to the proposed financing and acquisition by them of Mart. Why is income from OML 18 apparently being directed solely to the benefit of Eroton, the vehicle created for the OML 18 purchase, and provides no financial benefit to Mart despite Mart having an expressed interest of about 10% in that field through Midwestern.
I do not recall that the Board has disclosed the reasons for the rapid departure of Wade Cherwayko from his Executive position in Mart. Had his departure, or any subsequent actions by Wade, played any part in Mart’s current plight, or has Wade any business or other connections with any of the other Parties (mainly Midwestern or the Nigerian Bank) which could be influencing events."
 

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>