If for no other reason but to avoid potential legal liablity, it probably made sense that following his CEO appointment, Mr. Marleau took time to assess WOF's status before he and the WOF Board of Directors (Board) issued any "material" disclosures. However, I hope the WOF February 17 news release (N/R) from the Board is not a vision of what is to come: more pure generalities. My perception of the substance of the N/R is that WOF needs money in the short-term for cash flow, and in the long term for capital expenditures to make the Sandong mine commercially feasible, and that, meanwhile, negotiations with IMC "continue."
So, do we all feel more enlightened now with this soundbit disclosure? I don't. I can't even tell if the contents of the N/R contain anything new, or represent a restatement of what has always been the WOF state of affairs, to wit: WOF needs money and there is no guarantee it will get it. Is this new?
For instance, I know that to this day, we have not been provided with substantive information addressing apparent stumbling blocks in our company's path toward financing with Shinahan Bank and/or our negotiations with IMC. We are simply advised that “negotiations continue." However, now we are apparently informed that, absent "considerable additional funds," the mine is not ready for commercial production. Are these "considerable funds required" the same funds previously "required" from the proposed Shinahan financing, or new, additional unplanned funds? Who could know the answer to this question from WOF N/R? Up to now, I believe we shareholders have been led to believe that, aside from deal completion with Shinahan Bank and IMC, commercial mine production was ready to begin in late 2013, or 2014. Is that still true, or is it not? Are additional (not previously accounted for) funds required, or are they not? Surely, a competent news release, e-mail to shareholders, conference call, or other guidance from the company could have publicly clarified this now "unknown factor." Moreover, such a clarification might have avoided an expected share sell off from this out of context reference to WOF's (new?) need for (additional?) (unguaranteed) "considerable additional funds." The same holds true for the balance of the N/R addressing WOF's current short term cash needs, w/o "guaranteed" financing. Since when has WOF not needed pre-production short term financing? Since when has such financing been "guaranteed?" So what's new? Why such a release now? Repentance? Plowing old ground? Who knows? Well, we'll see on the next trading day how the market reacts to this bumbling, if not distortive N/R. I can't imagine the reaction will be good. I think we "retail" shareholders need a little "input" here.
I don't have the total share count of all WOF retail (non-institutional) investors, or how difficult it would be to galvanize them into a voting bloc. I do know that we don't have a separate "class" of shares distinct from Institutional investors, but I sense we may have differing interests. if this is true, than I submit the time has come for us to unite to obtain meaningful representation to protect our "retail" shareholder rights and financial interests in the management of this company. Stated otherwise, I think we "retail" investors should collectively try to vote a director onto the WOF Board to represent and protect our "retail" interests, rather than be left in the dark of somebody else's bigger picture of how this deal is to come down that may leave us out. In this respect, although I am glad Ned Goodman was "appointed" to the Board, nobody asked me to vote on his appointment. What was your vote? Have you ever been asked to vote on any WOF action corporate action? Why not?
I don't know the procedure so I look forward to insight from others on this board concerning how we could obtain a shareholder vote for a director candidate of our choosing and/or how we could obtain some shareholder voting on the ultimate issues being currently pursued, or not pursued, by management and our Board, once we are enlightened as to what those issues actually are. Seg.