RE:RE:RE:management talks the talk but fail to walk the walkcueballtwo -
Why do you consider that Joness Lang should answer you instantaneously?
I have owned many junior gold explorers through the years and currently own a considerable tranche of Maple shares. I have corresponded with Joness Lang numerous times but he does not always answer right away. Patience is required.
You say you "gave them the benefit of the doubt" when the newsletter writer maligned them. Did you? It doesn't sound like it. Did you ever consider that said newsletter writer is a very large part of the reason your shares are "WAY UNDER WATER?" Your use of capitals in communicating suggests there is an emotional element to your reaction and when speculating in junior golds there is no place for emotion.
Perhaps you should be directing your invictive towards the newsletter writer instead of Mr. Lang whom I am sure will answer in due time assuming you are polite and reasonable which many shareholders are not.
I would try calling him to express your concerns.
You stated, "There is something quite unprofessional about how Maple handles shareholder relations and it seems both arrogant and bordering on illegal to not answer to the shareholder owners of this company."
This is in my experience entirely false. In fact, some of the most productivie companies spend their time making discoveries rather than fluffing shareholders.
You do yourself and other shareholders a disservice by making incendiary statements such as these. It also makes me wonder if in fact Joness Lang has a reason not to wish to speak with you. People who work to prove up gold in the companies we own are human also and deserve respect unless they have done something to clearly reap scorn. This is not the case with Maple. I have found them all very forthcoming and now that the drills are running they deserve our support rather than the reverse.