Let’s not overstate the Vanadium resource. FMS has plenty and I...

Let’s not overstate the Vanadium resource. FMS has plenty and I would expect that to increase with further drilling and exploration. Here is a link to the last resource update. http://flindersmines.com/wp-content/uploads/014_FMS_Canegrass_MRE-_30-January-2018.pdf

The big question is why are our board are not promoting the outstanding Canegrass Vanadium resource? Why hasn’t FMS updated the Canegrass Project on the FMS website? Why isn’t FMS singing from the rooftops about our great resource? Why were the future plans for Canegrass Vanadium not presented to shareholders at the AGM? Does FMS simply not want the market to get excited about our Vanadium resource, or another reason?

Next (tongue in cheek) FMS may “discover” a company that plans to build a rail line from Balla Balla to our PIOP IO resource but will do their absolute best not to excite shareholders about it or any potential shareholders or investors by promoting it. After all, why would FMS want to see our share price increase? Or, why not? Doesn’t make sense to me, does it make sense to others?

So now shareholders are faced with a board that claims an “independent” chairman (and other directors that “claim” they are independent) that appear not to have jointly stood up and demanded that the MD or equivalent director follow normal practice and present a plan forward to shareholders at the AGM. Did the “independent” chairman, that by all reports, do his level best to avoid open, frank and transparent questions and answers at the AGM stand up and fight for minority shareholders rights? If not, that certainly doesn’t smell of “independence” to me, but maybe there is another meaning of “independent” of which, I am unaware. If it was a Board decision not to provide an MD or equivalent presentation to shareholders at the AGM then just why would any of the directors agree to it? There are just two TIO directors on the board, surely not even they would instigate such an action. Would they? So who and why? It’s not hard for me to believe that the intent of the proposed change of the constitution was to simply shut down the AGM and avoid updating shareholders. How lucky we all are that the majority of shareholders saw through the proposed changes and didn’t give FMS the benefit of the doubt. Can we imagine what FMS might do given more powers?