RE: Latest in the bun fightI'll throw out a few comments on the private placement and today's Press Release from ISM.
First of all, I'll repeat - I'm biased when it comes to ISM. Randy Miller is the epitome of the type of Officer and Director I
don't want to see involved in any company. I have no idea what ISM's strategy might be, but as long as there is any way that ISM, Miller, or their friends might have any say in URSA management - I'll stay on the sidelines.
Now as far as the ISM Press Release. For starters, in my opinion, Randy Miller has set a new standard for hypocrisy - the pot calling the kettle black. I'll not give examples here, anyone interested can refer to comments on the ISM forum. This guy whines about nothing being said about a meeting for a vote on new Directors (a requirement that he triggered) until Jan 26. What did he think the November 19, 2010 Notice of Special Meeting was about? Surely the CEO of a company, capable of rating performance of another company's Directors could figure this out:
1) On November 1, he participated in an action that was said to be under section 105 of Business Cororations Act.
An excerpt from that Section states "
105 (4) Subject to subsection (3), if the directors do not within twenty-one days after receiving the requisition referred to in subsection (1) call a meeting, any shareholder who signed the requisition may call the meeting".
2) On November 19, URSA calls a special meeting.
As CEO of the URSA's largest shareholder, if Mr. Miller couldn't figure out the meeting was called, he had the right to call one. Why didn't he?
As for the placement, the company is not required to cease normal business operations because a 5% or 19.99% shareholder wants a vote on a new slate of Directors. When cash is minimal, is raising funds through a placement for exploration not part of normal business operations? And why is Miller convinced that all participants in the placement will support management. If ISM can make a case for the Director slate that they propose being capable of better "..
exploiting Ursa’s significant assets..." than the present Directors, why would they pass up on the marvelous opportunity that ISM has presented them?
In my opinion Mr. Miller did not foresee all the possibilities, and is now concerned that what he had hoped to engineer might not transpire. You want to play the game, and you get out stickhandled by someone on the other side. Too bad! I'd say Miller lost the first round. We'll see on March 3, if he can recover.
If I was betting, and the vote goes against ISM's slate, I'd bet that following the vote there is some selling pressure as the "reformers" try to ease out of their position without shooting themselves in the foot. My guess would be that all the larger sell lots will not just be ISM, I suspect that there were some others interested in the ISM "objectives".
Some UMJ supporters might say the departure of ISM would be a negative. My opinion is that not having Miller and company around might be a positive in the long run. Their presence on the ISM Board has not guaranteed great leaps in value for the ISM shareholders. Often investors in mining stocks want to invest in companies that explore and/or develop a mine, ISM seems to have lost that focus.