RE:What's with this company?SOTP valuation in part explains some of what you are zoning in on Dumont.
I own a relatively very small equity position here ith Mason Graphite.
In a previous post here I explained why most of any move in share price appreciation, in terms of actual development of the graphite bearing lands parcels into actually becoming a graphite mining project specifically, would now accrue for Nouveau Monde Graphite.
The reason for this is that the graphite properties have been optioned off to Nouveau Monde Graphite and also Mason's nearer to controlling interest in Black Swan Graphene is not expected to generate any revenues for either SWAN or Mason Graphite, specifically during this relatively long interim "development period.
As I understand, you too are a shareholder of NanoXplore, NanoXplore being a company which Mason Graphite representatives have seemingly only relatively recently been seen as making strides toward somehow attempting to emulate to some extent.
I have nothing against what the folks over at Mason Graphite are attempting, as specifically pertains to their formation of Black Swan Graphene with Thomas Swan stakeholders. I do, however, note that Thomas Swan, Mason Graphite and their jointly owned Black Swan Graphene enterprise have been attached to and are now somewhat dependent on their respectively held exposure to a currently non-binding business relationship being further developed and forged with Nouveau Monde Graphite.
Nouveau Monde Graphite stakeholders aspire to develop said company into becoming a integrated graphite bearing lands developer, graphite miner and a downstream graphite processing and spheronized and coated graphite "BAM" manufacturring operations sustaining equities issuer.
Certainly, Nouveau Monde Graphite stakeholders and strategic business development architects have much larger plans than what I mentioned.
Never the less, you get the jist of what an suggesting Dumont.
The current seemingly very low to no interest in Mason Graphite is, in my opinion, in great part due to several reason, some of which I spoken to and other which are quite obviously relating to the overall sentiment of equities markets participants, persons who may have been exposed to experiencing their capital being partially wiped out, and precisely what created the circustances for such a experience to result. See the no longer overly abundant, cheaply attained and easy deployed capital which is definitely not available today.
NanoXplore had to work for it's existing status and above all it took years of hard work successfully employing a strategic business development plan and the having the perseverance to stick to and not stray away - as Mason Graphite representatives and stakeholders elected to erredly do by selling their circa 20% stakehold in NanoXplore - from what was then known to be a superior business plan.
Mr. Nazarpour & Co always understood that it's in the "downstream business segments validated and qualified specific applications of a graphite feedstock and it's derivative graphene that the larger realized value and greater profitability can be had.
Mason Graphite stakeholders went off on their own, abandoning NanoXplore in the process, only to finally discover that fact for themselves or perhaps have Thomas Swan stakeholders point it out for them.