whaler,

"Maybe this is where Langmuir could be "spun out"?"

And maybe it's not!

Maybe you should revisit your own guide lines for posting on this forum. One would assume your same rules should apply to all posts. Whether they be deemed "soft bashing" or not, it shouldn't really make any difference, should it?

Surely you are aware of, what putting too much faith in whatever is considered the opposite of "soft bashing", does, or can do, for a persons expectations concerning their investments.

"Repeated statements of non-factual rhetoric and off the cuff soft bashing will not be allowed. Scintering what was supposed to be a response to one thing with many other sidetrips into lala land of sideways soft bashing isn't welcome here either. the list of what ifs is a mile long. Stick with what is real and what can be verified.

If these rules were applied to all posts and not just those you deem as "soft bashing" then opinions and pure speculation are not permitted here, unless of course, they are based on verifiable facts.

Seems strange that you now want to open up the forum with speculative posts about Ursa Major Minerals. "To see a mention of cash flow and what they plan to do with it does make for wonderful speculation here on the boards."

It appears I'm having trouble with following even your logic this week. All I originally wanted to know, was how two posters both managed to arrive at the same conclusion that the 6 million loan and the 10.51% Ursa Major Minerals purchase were connected. I've asked them for their reasoning and they've not divulged it, so be it.