Laurion Mineral Exploration Inc V.LME

43-101

[goldenI]

One point that I wanted to discuss and that has nothing to do with buyout prices or valuation is in regards to the 43-101 National Instrument.

 

I have seen posts here that reference a Facebook post from Roger that Laurion will not produce a 43-101 before a buyout as it is not in the shareholder's best interest.

 

This is disengenuous at best and it twists the intent of the 43-101.

 

From Wikipedia:

 

The purpose of National Instrument 43-101 is to ensure that misleading, erroneous or fraudulent information relating to mineral properties is not published and promoted to investors on the stock exchanges overseen by the Canadian Securities Authority. 

The NI 43-101 was created after the Bre-X scandal to protect investors from unsubstantiated mineral project disclosures.

The narrative here is that the buyout price will be based on the GEOs. I agree. All potential suitors have access to the full data. Ok. Neither of those are mitigating factors in releasing a 43-101.

So how is not releasing a 43-101 in shareholder's best interest?

That is one thing about a tightly held company. We can ask but the ability to apply pressure is limited.

[Lambosntendies]

They're still drilling and defining the boundaries of their strike zone. Why would they spend the money and time doing an ni 43-101 now? There's zero benefit to the company or shareholders at this point. They haven't released a mre wether it be indicated or inferred so there are no numbers they even could be using to mislead anyone right now.  I think a big reason they don't

[NoRealPlan]

  Agreed! I want a 43-101 i want it soon, so I can know that all the hype is not just bs.

[Lambosntendies]

I have a feeling you are going to be waiting for a long time... I would love to see one too but the reality is we propably wont. No publicly disclosed MRE means no need for money and time to be spent on a 43-101. If you cant take the heat get out of the kitchen! Plenty of "safer"  potential plays that have good 43-101s out there if you look but the majority of them have a lower

[matlas]

That is not going to happen NoRealPlan, so get over it. Roger explicitly reiterated that they are not going to be releasing resource estimates before buyouts. That has been previously reported in the forum. Cynthia also confirmed to DAM$ in an email that no plans to do 43-101. She gave an explanation for it; he just said not in interest of the shareholders. I have my own theory that i have

[matlas]

Sorry, I meant "including institutions"

[Wizzle]

Well written but I don't think your theory adds up.  F&F are at 91% and have stuck in in for this long.  F&F would have to sell half of all their shares for it to matter.  Addtionally, What percentage of the company does Cynthia, Roger, and the rest of the board have?  are they not close to 50% on their own? 

[matlas]

Wizzle my theory is based on the fact that, I think, that in takeovers, in order to get expedited implementation, you sometimes need 90%. Just 50% won't always do it.. If there are any corporate lawyers out there, maybe they can weigh in. If 50% is enough, then I am wrong.

[matlas]

Further to last post, I think it (having 90%) relates to ability to implement a "squeeze out" transaction via a Plan of Arrangement" if not all shareholders tender their shares pursuant to the bid. Remember, any buyer will want to be assured of getting 100%. As indicated, perhaps a corporate/securities lawyer could weigh in.

[Lambosntendies]

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe at one point Roger stated that he was Lmes second largest shareholder at 10% second only to Cynthia who is 20% giving them a combined 30%. 

[Wmaver]

no that is wrong.   Cynthas shares are tracked and public knowledge.  last i looked she had around 16 million shares which puts her at about 6% 

[Lambosntendies]

Hm right you are there my freind. Apologies for my misinformation. Cheers! 

[ilovexau]

Well since we are all expressing opinions, here is mine, Which of course is the correct one.  No they are not trying to suppress the SP, that is silly.  The board controls over 60%. F&F control the remaining 30%.  So get that out of mind.  Plus higher SP makes funding easier with less dilution.   In terms of the 43-101, it has been stated before that there is no

[Primpage]

I do believe this to be incorrect. Cynthia stayed in an email to me that she owned 30 million shares, that email was sent on November 3. In a conference call in February she mentioned that between her Roger and the board, they had collectively approx 56 million. The insiders haven't bought any since as per the sedi website. Therefore they have approx 22% of the shares and the F&F have the

[DAM$]

As per the SEDAR insider report  listed insiders 60.9M shares or 23.7% or about 28% including warrants and options. Nubers only slightly different but up to date Name Shares Options Warrants Cynthia 6831218 620000   Cynthia Indirect 9633088 850000  

[Neil68]

Primpage, You mentioned a conference call in February. Can you expand on this?  Was this call by invitation only to large shareholders?  Was there any other info. that can be disclosed?

[Primpage]

I believe it was an invitation only and nothing was discussed besides the most recent corporate presentation that's currently on the corporate website.

[matlas]

I don't think the numbers support your position. I stand by my ptreviously expressed theory.