Vanchester,
The split between Langmuir and the balance of the ISM holding is quite clear in the last set of Financial Statements published in February 2009. ISM has spent approximately $17M on Langmuir to date, $10M on the other holdings and has $26M in liquid, or near liquid assets. This $26M includes the $6M loan that they indicated in those set of Financial Statements that it would be repaid in the near term,with interest (time will tell). Given that there are approximately $72.4M shares outstanding, the $26M in liquid, or near liquid assets (including the 6M loan is a demand loan) equates to $0.36/share. The $17M investment in Langmuir equates to $0.23/share and the $10M in the balance of the holdings equates to $0.13/share. This is how we end up with $0.72/share book value (based on interm Financial Statements of Feb '10). If we pro-rate these numbers to the current share value of $0.34 then we would have $0.17 in liquid,or near liquid assets, $0.11 for Langmuir and $0.06 for the remaining ISM holdings. This would put the split, as you suggest, not at 50/50 but at $0.23 for liquid assets and non-Langmuir holding, and $0.11 for Langmuir holdings.
However, assuming that liquid, or near liquid assets are as good as cash how do we say that what in reality is $0.36/share is $0.17 in this computation? This differential I equate to lack of confidence in ISM managment. When management refer to the market as discounting their holdings, this is what ISM management is referring to. As I would agree that splitting the Metal Mines off and sending them directly to ISM shareholders does not make any sense, they are trying to get the market to realize that they are worth more than the money in the bank. Right now, the market is setting the value of ISM at th money in the bank and have no confidence in any of their holdings. As I am not a basher, and I am a realist, ISM management have to assume the majority of the responsbility for the current negative view of ISM. ISM management, to their credit, paid for approximately 50% of the cost of their holdings, and the services rendered, in the form of stock that was at a much higher value when acquisitions/services were acquired. However, no one likes to get screwed and that is probably how the parties that sold ISM their holdings and/or services feel. The real dillema for ISM management is that engaging in trading shares for acquisitions/services with ISM shares at these levels will result in an accelerated dilution of ISM shareholders. This is why there is a push to increase shareholder value.
Bottom line, ISM management need some positive results to gain the confidence of the market to improve shareholder value. Right now, the market has discounted any value in ISM holdings and appear to have valued ISM for the value in liquid, or near liquid assets. These are the type of questions that need to be asked, and answered, at the annual meeting and the members of this an associated forums should organize.
aatozz
P.S. In all fairness the ISM management, if you look back at all of the ISM News releases, they always indicated the the potential in the Langmuir property was in the "Open Pit" mining of Langmuir.
