Vanstar Mining Resources Inc. V.VSR

VMNGF

[Talhasee]

Jack Sprat - yes,  I am sure many others would like to see Garland's comments as well, myself included. 

Further to John Kaiser's report - one thing we have to consider which John mentioned is 
that IMG could possibly demand VSR's participation in any further drilling in the Nelligan area - something I guess we as shareholders were not aware of as we are not privy to the agreement between IMG and Vanstar, but obviously John got this information from VSR management. 
Our 2 million in the bank would soon be gone, and IMG may not demand this but now we know there is a possibility of this happening.  This would not bode well for the shareholders.  

I still question VSR's management decisions - why did we drill Bousquet with VSR money just to hand it back to IMG and receive llittle or no value for Bousquet? I strongly question why the royalty was not treated separately into another entity?  

I was planning on voting No, but now I question that decision because of John's comments.  I do lend weight to John Kaiser's review of the overall situation.

[unclebobby]

Img float 481Million+shaes  VSR  58+MIL

[willyk3]

Exactly Talhasee.....When i read his analysis I was thunderstruck at the idea that IMG could do some sort of JV and demand payment.  I was under the impression that our non contributary carried interest was cast in stone. Not sure I believe it but if true it certainly casts our poker hand in a poor light. As to the spinout of our other projectsand royalty...can we justify this management to

[1dollarinto2]

The potential for it to become a joint venture with Vanstar owning 25% and participating in costs rather than 20% and having no costs isn't new or surprising. The issue for a junior like VSR is how to raise their share of the costs without diluting at a low price. I've seen companies partner up with a competitor of the main partner in situations like these to avoid dilution, help pay for