Sorry, Herb. I owe you an email.

Jim's contact information is at the bottom of every press release issued by the Company.

For example: http://web.tmxmoney.com/article.php?newsid=84729563&qm_symbol=FMG 

Lar

I found the following in the most recent MD&A.

"The Magpie Mines Inc.
 The Company, now a subsidiary of Fancamp Exploration Ltd., is currently seeking a Federal Government grant, part of the process of financing a pilot plant necessary for the commercialization of its proprietary Magpie Process, a low cost and low emission method of separating high purity TiO2 from titaniferous iron ores.  The interest of a number of industrial users is considerable and of course essential to the ultimate development of such a plant. "

That suggests to me that Fouad's patent is licensed to Fancamp's subsidiary Magpie Mines, or that the rights to the patent are the property of Magpie Mines Inc.

The word "its" and "proprietary" suggest ownership, but...???

Lar

Here's some information from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office

(12) Patent Application:
(11) CA 2941424
(54) English Title:
THE PRODUCTION OF HIGH-GRADE SYNTHETIC RUTILE FROM LOW-GRADE TITANIUM-BEARING ORES
(72) Inventors (Country):
KAMALEDDINE, FOUAD F. (Canada)
(73) Owners (Country):
KAMALEDDINE, FOUAD F. (Canada)
(71) Applicants (Country):
KAMALEDDINE, FOUAD F. (Canada)

Whether there is a deal in place between Fouad and FNC is not known to me.

Lar

I reviewed all of the filings on the Canadian Intellectual Property Office and the World equivalent, and I do not see any evidence of the patent being issued, yet. The process appears to be well advanced. I see no obstructions in the paperwork and reports filed with respect to novelty, inventiveness, or commercial applicability of the process. It simply appears to take a long time to reach the end of the process.

Lar

Tony, I don't mean to disappoint, but one single vote would re-elect any person on the management slate of directors. Any vote withheld is of no import whatsoever.

The TSX requires that listed companies disclose whether they require a majority vote to re-elect a director, but that is not mandatory. So, not an issue. On the Venture, that guideline does not apply. So, that's really not an issue.

Therefore, and just as an example, Peter Smith could vote in favour of electing Debra Chapman, and vice versa, and they would both be elected for another year.....provided of course that they both had so much as a single voting share as at the record date. Any voting decision of any other shareholder would not matter one bit. Only positive votes are recorded with respect to the election of directors. Elections to withhold a vote with respect to the election of a director are not counted.

The only possible alternative to this scenario, at the present time, is to have an alternative slate of directors proposed by means of a dissident proxy circular, which would be distributed prior to the AGM according to clearly defined rules, which may also include restrictive timelines defined in advance notice by-laws of the corporation. If the filing of the circular describing the dissident slate meets the required filing and distribution guidelines, then only "for" votes are counted with respect to the election of directors put forward on either the management or dissident slates of prospective directors. The elected Board of Directors could include members from both slates.

I want to be clear, this situation is not unique to Fancamp. I merely laid it out in the context of this specific corporation.

Lar

Thank you for so quickly providing a contextual analysis of the hyperloop proposal. In my simplistic view, I had not even considered nonlinearity of the track bed. I had not even considered the cost of evacuation of the air from a huge structure, nor the cost of propelling the vehicle within it. The propulsion cost of accelerating the freight (and the braking it at the terminus) must also obey Newton's Laws. Neither energy nor momentum can be created or destroyed. There is no free ride.

Rail transport has been a part of our social/industrial lives for nearly two centuries because it makes sense. If you can provide a stable rail bed, at an acceptable grade, with traction motors to pull a load uphill and to slow it on the other side, at a cost that beats other means of transport, you have a successful business.

Despite the decline of rail transport in our lives, it remains an essential component of our economy. Because rail transport makes sense.

GN,

Lar