Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Ursa Major Minerals Incorporated T.UMJ



TSX:UMJ - Post by User

Comment by victor2009on Mar 14, 2011 11:45am
230 Views
Post# 18281113

RE: Insider buys 120,000 shares

RE: Insider buys 120,000 sharesI questioned your statement, which was ""I don't see Randy Miller intentionally selling it at any kind of a loss, especially if he has used company funds to make the investment"

Changing the wording, as you did in your response, does not provide the answer. In particular I asked how selling could be anything but intentional; how selling at the price levels to which the poster referred could result in a loss; and how anything other than company funds could be used to acquire the shares.

I was overly kind in classifying your statement as being confusing. I should have ignored any attempt at diplomacy and called it for what it is - inane.

You must have realized this when you responded, as you avoided all three points by deflecting with a reference to cupricity's post - which in no way explained the inanity of your comment.

You then posted a further deflection asking that I post a link to a source that states that Randy Miller and and ISM "feel that UMJ is inadequately managed".  I could play your game of obfuscation by getting into semantics and saying whaler, can you post a link to where I state there is a direct statement that Randy Miller and ISM "feel that UMJ is inadequately managed"?  I'm not here to play those games, when a company makes a public statement "The purpose of the meeting is the election of a new slate of directors to be nominated by the Corporation" [the corporation being Inspiration Mining]", I take that as the equivalent of stating their feelings that URSA is inadequately managed. What is your interpretation of ISM's feelings when they request a special meeting of Ursa shareholders to elect a slate of Directors that ISM nominates to replace the existing Directors?  Is that not an indictment of the management capability of URSA? Or was ISM simply suggesting that they would prefer a group that adhered to the dress standards established for the ISM Board meetings? Given some of their past Board decisions, that would not come as a surprise to me.

whaler, I would love to hear your thoughts on the strategic plans of Inspiration Mining, the company you have praised and supported for four almost years. But on Stockhouse, if you make a statement that someone feels requires explanation, that someone is free to ask for that explanation. And when you dodge the requested explanation, that someone is free to comment on your actions. It may be different than the forum you are used to participating on, where you act as Judge and Jury. 
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>