Hi everybody, I have been monitoring this board since inception and must say that the quality of discussion seems to be of a more analytical level than other boards. This is my first posting and I just want to mention a few things.

• First the Calgary Herald article which is based upon the AGM might be of interest.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...

• I attended the AGM yesterday and was impressed by the reinteration both during the presentation and after in face to face with Dick that future expansion (after current credit line) will be from internally generated funds. As a result no dilution of present share structure. To me this was a very important point as it directly affects my shareholder value.
• A question was asked at the AGM about the timeline of applying for future pod government approval. A general overview was given by Dick which I asked in face to face after the meeting to be more specific. Basically he said that yes they can apply for more than one pod approval at a time, but that these are very complicated government applications which have to be accurate, particuarly in their environmental projections. To do it properly, they only have enough staff to do one at a time. As an aside from personal experieince I might add that organizations always have a limitation as to the capability of staff and you do not necessarily increase a company's abilities by hiring more staff. It was an answer that I was comfortable with.
• Dick made a comment that they wanted to ensure that Pod 1 was going to be operable at the 10,000 bbl/d and would spend time optimizing the blending of dilutents to ensure the most efficient mix over the long term, implying to me that sustainability is a major factor with them.
• I asked a question at the public portion of the AGM about the environmental focuses of Connacher. This was due to my belief that the environmental movement has gained strength that will translate into higher regulatory and enforcement standards for all companies involved in the oil and natural gas industry. This was before Imperial Oils appeal on the Kearl permit was turned down today. I was heartened by Dicks response in that they are trying to anticipate where they have to be to meet future regulatory requirements as well as they do not have the same environmental footprint as the mining of oil sands has. I guess what really got my attention in this regard was a half musing (I do not know how serious he was) that they might try and establish some wetlands for migratgory birds. Having worked in and consulted to the public sector, these re the kinds of focuses that lead to favourable perspectives of government and from my shareholder perspective would be money well spent protecting my investment.

As a very first post I trust that the above perspective is helpful. Having said that do believe that I will be spending my time reviewing your posts a whole lot more than that of my contributing to the board.