Well, if not forked, at least a little crooked.
Everyman is entitled to his opinion, Rosseau makes these statements as if they were fact.
- Noront has severely diluted its McFaulds Lake claims position by entering into at least 11 different option agreements, which also drained and distracted Noront's administrative and operating resources;
- Noront is squandering its leadership position in the McFaulds Lake area by optioning out its ground, rather than consolidating other players in the region to form a company with critical mass which is capable of bringing a project into development;
This board had long discussions on this strategy and it was generally agreed that RN has the right idea.
Here's how it actually works:
In return for an OPTION to gain 50% rights on a claim, company A gives NOT money, agrees to give more money in the future and to spend money on exploration by X date.
This accomplishes a number of things to Noront's benefit-
- Noront gets the area explored more quickly, potentially greatly increasing shareholder's value in a short period of time (many drills now drilling).
- Noront accomplishes this without spending its own money reserves, and in fact, makes money, money that can be put into NOT's own prioritized development targets.
-
If there is success, NOT retains a full 50% ownership and acts as the operator.
- If the the other company does not fullfill its duties, the property returns to NORONT.
I wonder why Rosseau does not acknowledge these positives?
Maybe he is just a money man - not a seasoned exploration wizard who looks to long term success versus short term profits.
I think I'll stick with Mr. Nemis' 28 years of experience on this one.
BK
