Did you not read my post? I would think that I had expressed my wonder enough in that post.

I thought it was obvious that I'd read your prior post, but IMO your latest post certainly expresses far more wonder!

Having said that, let me add that I would also thinki that Randy Miller is proobably a guy with the biggest credibility issues at ISM being the longest employed and having gone thru a dud of a 43-101 he would or should be a little gunshy when spouting off publically.

I'm not sure why you conclude "being the longest employed " and a "dud of a 43-101" should affect a persons credibility issues. I don't recall reading anything attributed to Randy Miller regarding estimated tonnage. grade, or economic viability, perhaps I missed something. I do remember reading the darcel report, and then re-reading selected quotes from it hundreds of times on bullboards. The dud of a 43-101 as you perceive it, really wasn't a dud to anyone who took the time to read the drill results and didn't rely on darcels "conservative" calculations.

As you may know this company is notorious for keeping investors informed and keeping up with the tradition this latest NR makes me go hmmmm?

I thought they were notorious for keeping investors uninformed!

On the other hand, a guy may wonder if it is just more of the same and that this CEO may just not learn from past lessons taught by unfulfilled promises and the resulting shareholder/market reactions to any lack of fulfillment at any level, big or small.

One would think that a persons track record should speak for itself. I'm not sure which specific unfulfilled promises you are referring to that resulted in shareholder/market reactions.

So is he stupid, ignorant, bold, arrogant, sauvy or what?

With the exception of "sauvy" quite possibly he's none, or all of the above. (Sauvy definition?) You could just as easily ask is he clever, intelligent, cunning, unadventorous or what? All you know for sure is, he's certainly getting paid every month.

Yeah yeah, it's the old saying about people in glass houses should not throw stones. If he's so astute/sauvy in this game, then why hasn't he worked the same new found magic on ISM in the past? IMHO As a "self-proclaimed long term shareholder"... I will be the first to say Randy's track record for "increasing shareholder value" here in the ISM camp SUCKS!

Not sure why the proverb about glass houses is relevant! You then ask what I'd already alluded to, why no big guns with mining background for ISM. Are you sure that you're the first to say Randy's track record for ""increasing shareholder value" here in the ISM camp SUCKS!" I'm pretty confident I've read similar quotes many many times before. Seems you are now giving the market no credibility when it comes to putting a worth on ISM.

I also note that the two companies are different in a big way, UMJ is a producing miner with incomes/cash flow from it's mining activity, as well as doing a little exploration. ISM is pure spec, pure explorer. I would think it is Randy Miller of all people who would know and recognize this difference more so than you and I. Maybe UMJ is what Randy wants ISM to be? Maybe it's going to be a re-invention of itself thru UMJ and their operations?

I'm not so sure that ISM is still classed as "pure spec" they do have that "dud of a 43-101" as you refer to it out in the public domain. As for ISM being a pure explorer, just looking at their news releases over the past 18 months could easily make a person beg to differ. As for Randy knowing or being able to recognise the differences between a producer and pure spec explorer better than you, maybe he can, but why do you assume he knows more than me? Remember I wasn't disappointed with the "dud of a 43-101" it was actually a little better than I'd thought it was going to be. In my defense it was also based on a lot lower cut off grade than I'd anticipated.

If Randy wants ISM to be another UMJ that's an easy fix. Why not start work on the second phase of the Ni 43-101 and see what the economical viability is. The money ISM has spent on UMJ shares could just have easily gone towards doing just that. Didn't that thought ever cross your mind?

Again for your sake, and the other weekend warriors visiting, I have to ask what gives this CEO so much confidence to make such bold statements?

whaler, you've been participating in these type forums for decades now and if you choose to answer a post it's because you felt compelled. When, and if I choose to post is my choice. Besides is there really a need for a response to the Bids and the now newly included Asks posts? I have no control of when you, or ISM write something that I feel I want to respond to. As for what gives this CEO so much confidence to make such bold statements, well, last time he said he was going to put forward a slate of new directors it didn't amount to a hill of beans. Maybe he suffers with memory loss, or some other ailment, really who of us is in a position to speculate.

Are you inferring that I think Stewart J. is a big gun here, I am not the one bringing up his name. However while it is up, I can't deny my past admiration for Stewart's background and achievements stand up for themselves. But getting back to my original post, I have no clue who they have in mind for their "slate of directors". That's why I asked out loud in my previous post. What does he have in mind that will turn UMJ around for shareholders, how will he sell this at to present UMJ shareholders?

You didn't bring up Stewart Jacksons name I did. I also wondered if he was available and in search of a new gig. You certainly can't deny your past admiration for Stewart Jackson's background and achievements, it's written in more than a few posts on a couple of different websites. Just to clarify do you still admire him? I assumed it was a foregone conclusion that you don't have a clue as to whom they have in mind for their slate of directors, Knowing would surely amount to insider information wouldn't it?

Yep! I noticed that too, just like I have noticed that there are few buyers and sellers as of late. I had mentioned before the lack of operational news earlier in the week. The stock is trading accordingly. Stagnation, waning, idling, it's simply doing nothing as people await news. You reap what you sow, correct? Basically people are sitting on the fence

I'm surprised you also noticed that ISM didn't trade a single share on Friday. Your lack of public noting made me do a retake. When you mentioned lack of operational news I assumed you were hoping for the promised within 90 days updated Ni 43-101 what do you think the chances are of that being another "dud"? As for reaping what you sow, well sometimes a spanner gets thrown in the works and that tends to screw up everyone.

In the end when we talk about deadlines and 43-101's, we cannot forget that outside influence we know as MICON............enough said! It comes, when it comes :)

Outside influences that result in a timeframe delay are best addressed with a news release by someone who looks forward to communicating with the shareholders don't ya think? Enough said