Don't Count on Production This Month or This YearIn my opinion, the track record of management has been horrible since they took over a few years ago. Covid is not an acceptable excuse. The management contracts they establsihed for themselves when they took over control ensured that they could accrue substantial fees which could be at a future date be settled for dirt cheap shares in the company. The problem with these type of contracts is that there is an incentive for management to take its time and even delay achieving certain milestones. Why hurry or communicate with shareholders when each extra month adds another chunk of money owing to them by the company which can then be converted into dirt cheap shares at a future date ? The poor record of communicating with shareholders is well documented (see postings of this board where many investors are not receiving timely responses from the company with respect to questions) and is also not surprising. Again, there is no incentive to communicate, no penalty for the failure to communicate. If you read the news releases of the company since the Wessons took over, they kept emphaszing that they were seeking financing and that they would be doing so with the objective of limiting dilution. Well you know the expression "actions speak louder than words" is quite true. While talking up the notion of limiting dilution, they acted in a manner that is inconsistent with that ideal. Initially engaging a financing partner for a drawdown facility may appear to have been a good financing decision but companies normally engage in such a deal when they are desperate for funds - I have been in the markets for over 40 years - anytime a company engages in such a drawdown facility, it's a red flag that other investors view the project / company as ultra high risk - essentially almost like a lender of last resort. So the question is, with the connections and supposed successes of the Wessons in previous restructuring efforts, why didn't they advance the small funds themselves in the form of a shareholder advance or note payable or seek an accredited investor to put in the several hundred thousand dollars ? When the price of gold soared above $2,000 per ounce, how is it possible that they were not able to find any investors who would put a paltry million or two dollars into the company at 5 cents a share ? I view the financing deal with the Russian company as a monumental error. It doubled the number of issued shares and on a fully diluted basis gaving away 2/3 of the company at a paltry level -- all at 5 cents per share. The financing was at 5 cents per share and the warrants were also at 5 cents per share - zero premium - normally the warrant exercise price is set at a level that is substantially higher than the unit price. The dilution created by the financing and the settlement of "management" fees has been massive. So much for the continual lip service of the management in the empty promises of limiting share dilution. A normal management team would have taken advantage of the rise in the price of gold and done several financings at progressively higher prices to move the project into the production restart - this was possible as the price of the stock rose from 5 cents in January to 10.5 cents in May of last year as investors were anticipating a restart. No excuses. Management did NOT capitalize on the uptrend. What a monumental error. In short, I own over a million shares of the company and can't wait to unload them later this year or next should there be another uptrend in the price which could happen if the company were to restart the mine. The company for the last year has been touting an April 2021 restart. Forget that. Notice that they recnetly dropped the "April" part of the April 2021 restart date. We'll be lucky to see it happen this year. As far as investing in any company run by the Wessons in the future - I won't be doing that.