Tantallon,
"But if Miller and company think that ISM shareholders money is best invested in UMJ, then maybe the ISM shareholders should look at switching out of their ISM shares and placing those proceeds into UMJ directly.
"Its not like Miller and crew have lots at stake investing in ISM anyway. So why should its shareholders carry the bag for management."
I think this idea had merit when I first suggested it. : Below excerpt from a post I made September 10 2010
"I will add from a PR point of view I actually think it's kind of risky. What's the incentive to purchase ISM shares?
Why purchase one share of ISM at 0.22 (Fridays close)? Apparently ISM believes that Ursa Major Minerals is a good buy. At 0.085 (Fridays UJM close) that's 2.5 shares for every 1 ISM. Don't most investors want more bang for their buck? Taking ISM's stated reason of "for investment purposes" as truth, (which you aren't completely buying) shouldn't one assume that ISM isn't investing to lose money?"
Tantallon, I hope you were typing with tongue in cheek! What benefit would ISM share holders now get from selling ISM to buy UMJ?
I can't help but wonder if by doing what you suggest, ISM shareholders wouldn't in effect, just be buying shares they already own from being an ISM shareholder! But that's just another idea............
As for doing DD on UMJ, just knowing that ISM owns 20%+ of this company might be more than enough to put potential investors off. Especially if they stumble onto the following : “I find that the serious allegations of misconduct levelled by the applicants against the respondents, the lack of merit to those allegations, and the tactical use made by the applicants of this proceeding combine to place the litigation conduct of the applications in the category of ‘reprehensible conduct,’” Judge Brown wrote.
