What I said was approved. Not proofed. The content is approved by Elmer. This means nothing was said that would violate the law where inside info was an issue.
Yes people, Elmer does know that I take licence with our conversations for style purposes. You'll also note that I have very few quotes in my write-ups. This is my style. I would need to tape the calls because they take 2-3 hours each time. No one complained about the last couple of times I did write-ups. Why now?
Yes, these are my enterpritations of the conversations. Not that I sneak in false facts or deliberate errors. I stand behind what I wrote. Now if I made an error copying from my shorthand or misnumbered a response that's a different matter and should be corrected so the conversation flows. I rushed this out for you guys.
I would suggest that you do not call the company to verify every word. You'll annoy Elmer and probably put an end to me publishing our talks. That will be your loss. My investors group will continue to ask questions albeit a lot less questions because we are more current on the subjects.
As for factuality, this time there is very little of my thoughts in any of the answers. The reason for that is because I let Vette put it on his blog whereas the last few times it's just been for us here and you guys have the benefit of knowing what I've already said. So the slight change is because of that. Here, I write more directly to you guys. There's a few guys on this board who've recieved a copy of the type of info I supply to my own group. They can tell you how very much different those are. If they are inclined to speak up I will leave that to them.
One last thing, Elmer gets an advance copy of the questions. You can't seriously expect him to spend 3 hours winging it. And yes, there's stuff we talked about that's not on the Q&A because it strays to far in to the geology and is private.
