Just a Perfect Day in the Many Perfect Days to FollowSome posters continue to throw out flippant statements about Novo management running a scam or a "lifestyle company". Despite Novo meeting the milestones that were previously ridiculed as "never to happen". Undaunted, they simply redirect their cynicism towards the next upcoming milestones, constructing additional fictious obstacles that will likely be mowed down like all prior barriers.
Others ponder the narrative of building the world’s greatest gold company, but without placing too much thought into the specific details of what that actually means. QH has his tentacles spread in a myriad of directions so it becomes difficult to even follow this narrative as well. Personally, when it comes to estimating a person’s goals or ambitions, I make a distinction between where they place their professional working energies (their labor of love) and their actual investment capital.
As for the accusations aimed at company management of "scamming investors", you don't have to go too far to assess the source of the opinion vs the reality. It’s even more absurd when accusations come from posters that admit to holding zero stakes in any one or all of these companies, while offering their unfounded suspicions of management plots coupled with their own personal investing acumen.
In the case of QH, he is building a legitimate business in which he firmly believes. There is no doubt. Where it becomes interesting is trying to speculate on the pathway and definition of what this business may actually look like. It is essential to examine where management places their personal stake in the companies in which they are involved. As well as their market trading activities during dips and spikes.
Fortunately for us, the public domain puts some clues right in front of our faces, if one bothers to take a look. And it involves much more than just Novo Resources.
Putting aside financial instruments such as Calls, Shorts, Stock Options, Warrants not traded, and Subscription Rights (whose value is determined when exercised) an investor can quickly ascertain the integrity and commitment of any executive of a publicly traded company listed on the exchanges. And possible gather hints on what greater project may be under construction.
Let us examine the current ownership list of tradable equity held by QH (as April 9
th market close):
| Trading Symbol | Market Price $CAN | Investment Type | Balance in Tradable Share Equity | Trading Market Value $CAN | Percent of Total Holdings |
| $NFG | 5.05 | Common Shares | 115,300 | 582,265 | 2.78 |
| $NVO | 2.78 | Common Shares | 3,160,000 | 8,784,800 | 41.94 |
| $NVO | 1.34 | Warrants | 10,500 | 14,070 | 0.07 |
| $TBR | 0.31 | Common Shares | 70,000 | 21,350 | 0.10 |
| $KUYA | 2.67 | Common Shares | 151,960 | 405,733 | 1.94 |
| $IRV | 2.34 | Common Shares | 2,073,500 | 4,851,990 | 23.16 |
| $ESK | 2.18 | Common Shares | 900,000 | 1,962,000 | 9.37 |
| $CN | 0.23 | Common Shares | 400,000 | 92,000 | 0.44 |
| $TSG | 0.28 | Common Shares | 35,000 | 9,800 | 0.05 |
| $MONT | 2.67 | Common Shares | 1,519,600 | 4,057,332 | 19.37 |
| $NVX | 0.27 | Common Shares | 225,000 | 59,625 | 0.28 |
| $PRG | 0.18 | Common Shares | 581,250 | 104,625 | 0.50 |
| | | | Total Value $CAN | 20,945,590.20 | 100.00 |
Note: Options, Rights, and Non-traded Warrants are not listed.
And the Presentation Page 4 of the Corporate Capital Structure:
https://www.novoresources.com/_resources/presentations/corporate-presentation.pdf What do these personal QH’s equity positions in Novo Resources, Newfoundland Gold (both personal and via Novo), Irving Resources, Eskay Mining, and Kuya Silver suggest about the future? Can one spot an obvious “anchor” underpinning it all? How about corners of a foundation? Where is there evidence of a lack of commitment, or an intention to “scam” investors? Let’s get real here.
What is much easier to observe, are the wheels wobbling off of the "integrity critics" clown car. If a poster chooses to criticize a manager’s vision, business decisions, and technical analysis – then so be it. The criticism may be valid and should remain at that level. But if it is blurted out by selectively ignoring the implications of publicly disclosed information, then the critic unwittingly destroys their own arguments and draw suspicion onto themselves.
And if a relentless cynic remains oblivious to this critical difference and the evidence above, then they bear the added burden of being an idiot as well.
Tx