Ann: Quarterly Activities Report , page-32

Thanks Flats and Swill!

At first it was easy to believe the company was very competent, "up front" and progress was assured.
Company presentations and many "helpful" postings on HC were presenting a unified scenario.

Since then there has been a pattern of events such that one might even consider a CCC complaint based around --

1. The pattern of posts which suggested CCU was safe, on task and had a great future and the timing of those posts.

2. Fund raising by share issues following glowing presentations and indicating positive outcomes in the future presented by the management -- followed by negative revelations soon afterwards.

3. Reports released by management. that appeared incomplete, incorrect or misleading.


One may hope that the works management was atrocious and this contributed to present problems and set backs.
Swill has suggested - for example - that a passing observation would be sufficient to realise that the retort provisions are completely inadequate for the promises of delivery presented by management.

One must concur that some of the information presented by the company was misleading and at best incompetent but possibly known at the time to be misleading..

Now shareholders must hold for perhaps another 12 months in the hope that some sort of competency and progress will enable management to get closer to their promised objectives.

One would hope that insiders/institutions will not profit from private shareholders which appears to be the pattern so far!