I’ve had it said to me that it’s high time—yet again—to put the issue of replacing the Board of Directors up for a vote. I don’t disagree. But I do advocate giving Jean Lafleur one last chance. That’s the purpose of the following letter, which I haven’t sent yet. I put it up for your comments and suggestions. Later, if you’re in favor of the same things I wrote about, it will be important for you to phone or email JL, to tell him as much.

I take the idea that I’m the spokesman for the greater number of investors very seriously. This is not my personal crusade. It’s important that JL receive direct evidence that that’s the case. Your communications need only be brief (if that’s what you prefer). But your participation is essential if we are to put across the fact that (beyond me) all of our shareholders—without exception—are in favor of maximizing the shareholder returns by putting into routine practice a plan similar to our own, which will highlight the value of our assets. The goal of the specific proposal we’ve been repeating (endlessly to no avail) is to establish, within one year, ongoing business relationships with two hundred or so influential people within the wider investment community.

If we fail to turn JL around, unfortunately, the alternative is to wash our dirty laundry in public again, as we did last year with the vote for the dissident Board of Directors’ slate. If we, eventually, feel compelled to go down that road again, I have two suggested improvements:

#1) The arrangements should not be made at the last minute (as before), which made it difficult for some people (especially Europeans) to register a vote against the status-quo.
#2) The issue should be as narrow and as uncontroversial as possible. Our goal is a higher share price. It’s simple. That’s it.

As follows is the letter, which represents our last attempt to turn JL around. Am I on the right track? Am I going too far? Or, not far enough? As it stands—or with the improvements that you give me—please let me know (on this Message Hub) whether or not I’m staying true to my pledge to express our consensus sentiment, not only the sentiment of the people who directly talk to me or directly send me Agoracom or email messages.

Hello Jean.

Significant numbers of Fancamp shareholders are dissatisfied with your failure to respond to the important recommendations we’ve repeatedly sent your way. I am writing to you today in a changed tone of voice because I am speaking on behalf of Shareholders for Accountability at Fancamp. Our present sentiment is ugly. Your giving us the silent treatment is as unacceptable as it is unjustifiable.

Possibly, you may contemptuously take no notice of our new tone of voice or even care about it. On the other hand, you may consider it a wakeup call. Either way, your response (or non-response) to our concerns will clear the air. Shareholders will—once-and-for-all—know whether you’re for us or against us (and whether we’re for or against you). If we’re lucky, we’ll finally learn whether it’s you—or someone behind you, pulling the strings—who’s advocating that we keep the company under-the-radar.

Since you’ve become CEO, three times Shareholders for Accountability at Fancamp asked for your answers to the seven-point reform recommendations we highlighted in our written correspondence to you. Even before you were CEO, more than once, we sent to you copies of substantially the same recommendations we addressed to your predecessor. You’ve repeatedly counseled patience. We’ve been patient. But even great patience comes to an end at some point. Why is your estimation of the loyal investors so low that we don’t so much as deserve any response from you whatsoever?

Fancamp is a company whose world-class hard resources and stock holdings and royalty contracts add up to multiple dollars per share. You would be hard pressed to find any public company, anywhere in the world, with such a disparity between its verified intrinsic value and the valuation it receives in the market.

Many shareholders recognize—and continue to give credit to—those who worked hard, for many years, to accumulate all that undeniable wealth. So, let’s be clear about the reason behind the complaints the shareholders express. Plain and simple, it’s our share price (compounded by the illiquidity associated with the declining market capitalization).

When you witness the share price of Fancamp being washed down the drain—by the day, by the week, by the month, by the year—don’t you think it’s long past time to come to the realization that you owe it to the shareholders to do something concrete about it? Do you grasp the gravity? The share price is not a mathematical abstraction. Attached to that number is the monetary value of the investments in the company made by the same people I’m representing. How appreciative do you think those people are of the silent treatment you’re giving them?

The last time we talked, you expressed surprise that there were no buyers of our stock. Who bares the responsibility for that? The shareholders? Outsiders? Or is it someone else who is managing the daily business practices of Fancamp? Who is it who—over and over again—fails to give any response whatsoever to the aspirations and the desires of the shareholders?

Where’s your business sense? Every legitimate public company that I ever heard of respects—even treasures—its investors. They go out of their way seeking ways to encourage investor feedback and investor participation. I can imagine no company needs to sell itself to investors as badly as we do. Yet, your standoffish attitude—even to the investors you already have—evidences a way of thinking directly the opposite of that (and directly the opposite of plain simple common sense).

Leaving shareholders to twist slowly in the wind is intolerable. Asking shareholders to be patient is a poisonous idea, when it comes after the years of financial deficits many have stoically endured. Being patient (according to your public statements) doesn’t mean being comatose. For a long time, the shareholders thought your predecessor would understand the urgency of taking action. As you well know, he let us down. With misplaced optimism, we thought your initial promises to change the corporate modus operandi were genuine.

Over and over again, you’ve received the seven-point reform recommendations Shareholders for Accountability at Fancamp sent to you. Do you have a problem appointing or hiring one person to speak twice to the investment advisory community per day? That will build and reinforce two hundred new investor advisory relationships per year. Are you so adamantly opposed to that—that you won’t so much as lower yourself to our level—even so much as to acknowledge that you have the dimmest awareness of any of our new business ideas?

Are the influential investment advisory institutions so enthralled with the excellence of our regular and continuing and well-planned communications with them, that your best counsel is to ignore the issue and pay no heed to the shareholders who have the nerve to bring it up? Do you think you are stimulating the investor community to reassess its disregard and its contempt and its ignorance of Fancamp by your dismissing (without a word said) the urgent reforms the shareholders advocate? I remind you; many of us are the people who’ve held on for years and paid dearly for it. Do you think you’re encouraging us to stand behind you by your holding our recommendations so loathsome as not to deserve an answer?

Giving your long-term shareholders the cold shoulder is your best idea of the best way to express your appreciation for the continuing support they’ve given you? Between you and the long-term shareholders, loyalty is a two-way street. Also, respect is a two-way street. What’s more, loyalty and respect are not states of mind guaranteed never to change forevermore. Besides being given, loyalty and respect can be taken away and reversed.

Best regards. Art.
[My full name.] Shareholders for Accountability at Fancamp.

[Through Agoracom Private messages and through the shareholder email addresses I have, I will distribute copies of this letter (revised, if that’s the case) to many of the interested parties known to me. Again, one way or the other, I encourage everybody to give me their feedback. Thank you.]