Almonty Industries Inc T.AII

RE:RE:RE:RE:Successful Placement of CDI’s Raises A$3.5 Million

[QuarterDollar]

• Well Whois...I can't fault the people on HotCopper. They have a right to their opinion and I am not going to defend LB on this board or any other.  IMHO, LB's priorities are the governments, major business partners, financial institutions. LB has to do a far better job than he has been doing for the retail shareholders. 

• The job was easier for LB going back a few years ago because first of all there was fewer shareholders (i.e. 150ish). And these shareholders are pretty savvy such as 5ilver (and many others) who have mining experience and has been at the Sangdong mine.  Collectively, (and many are/were here on this board) were able to put many pieces together and LB even eluded to in the past that we have very savvy shareholders.  For this reason, LB didn't have to put as much effort into public presentations and has had an easy ride from retail shareholders. 

• Over the past year, Almonty has picked up a lot of new shareholders and they are less forgiving. They don't know the history of what has happened (but they should if they did their due dilligence)...and what has transpired. They are not too pleased at LB's leadership over the past 12 months. AlI though I don't agree with some of their reasoning, however I have to agree with their sentiment:
  • 2 months behind schedule (could be more)
  • Jan 24th of this year, LB took funds from two Australian Institutions in exchange for equity. LB stated, Almonty didn't need money for financing or to pay the bills, but just this past week LB exchanged shares for funds to pay off what appears to be a Dundee debenture. Why wasn't the money from the fund raise by the 2 Australian Institutions put to this use?  At least some of the money should have been put to the repayment of the debenture. Why more dillution? 
  • Although the recent capital raise was in part necessary to address the unforseen recall of a debenture, but 3 questionable actions under 3 months is not good. (i.e. fund raise by 2 Australian Institutions, the extension of the expiration date of options for insiders, and the equity raise to pay the debenture).
  • LB told us original shareholders several years ago that we have been through enough and that he will avoid shareholder dillution, but slowly this is what we have seen. 
  • LB has originally stated that once getting the KfW financing that we would ramp up to maximum capacity. But that isn't the case anymore. It looks as if it will take 1 year to do the Phase 1 ramp up and another year for Phase 2. 
  • LB has stated two years ago that there would be increased news releases but that hasn't happened.  On the Almonty website, the Almonty fact sheet and the Investor Presentation conflict each other. LB has stated the IP is outdated, but at the IIF he puts no effort into talking about profitability and how much MTUs Sangdong will produce, plus uses an outdated IP presentation.  This is carelessness, and in my opinion is contributing to share price suppression.
  • And because the website is not updated, shareholders can't hold him accountable for anything because all of the information is outdated.
  • I for one can't calculate Almonty's profitability range because LB has made conflicting statements over the past while. And for me, some of his statements are convoIuded by intention.
  • LB has made the statement last summer that after receiving KfW financing that he was going to stay in SK until the Sangdong build was complete, but we heard the moderator at last Dec IIF state that LB was in New York. This is not a big deal as LB could be there on vacation or with family or perhaps in business discussions. But this does impact his image.  He says one thing and does another without explanation. And in his defence, he doesn't have to provide an explanation in the first place, but he shouldn't make misleading statements in the first place.
  • ...and there are many more examples but I think I have made my point.

• Perhaps LB has only the knowledge and experience to run Tier 3 mining companies and is totally out of his depth when it comes to Tire 1 companies.  This is why I said over a year ago that he has to prove himself because position is not safe. At that time, we liked him a lot, but now the tide is turning.  Maybe some consideration should be given to a leadership change. At the very least this should set a fire under LB's assets to make him do better for us Retail Shareholders.