Folks, educate yourselves by reading the SEC filings and you will not be misled into thinking that the insiders at SFMI are enriching themselves at your expense.

The insiders at SFMI, in management and on the board of directors, are not using their advantaged positions as an ATM machine.

Here is the link to the actual insider activity since last year's shareholder's meeting.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SFMI/insider-transactions

Look at it, people and tell the truth: what proof is there that insiders are feathering their own nest via shares acquired at advantageous prices or shares they obtained as payment for services rendered?

None.

The actual insider activity does not show these guys using this company as an ATM machine.

They are doing only two things: they are either in receipt of shares in lieu of payment for services rendered or they are outright market buyers.

Shares they received as payment are not restricted shares, and these shares could have been dumped during the year because, the attribution of price in each case valued the shares at prices that these guys could have made a profit on.

Let me cover that one more time: had these guys been out to fleece ordinary shareholders, the prices during the year were such that they could have timed the market and made a considerable profit.

But not a single instance of this having happened shows up in the ACTUAL record, does it?

Nope. Not a single time.

Here's the link again. Check it out.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SFMI/insider-transactions

There is not a single instance of any of these guys taking a profit on the shares they have gotten paid with.

And they have never been sellers, have they?

Just point out the link showing the sales? Where is the actual supporting evidence?

Just a single link to an actual fact would suffice.

Some storyline, LOL

OK, so they have not sold their “free” shares. But what about them having used their insider positions to buy at a better price than everyone else could have?

Well, the FACTS show that no insider EVER used his advantaged positions to buy shares at prices better than you or I could have.

All of the outright buys that any insider made were at market prices, which means that they had no advantage over any outsider.

Quote:
I realize that this runs contrary to the popular storyline, but it is documented fact: based on readily available public info, it is a fact that insiders are not using their advantaged position to make themselves rich at the expense of ordinary shareholders.

In fact, the evidence shows that these guys are upside down on the shares they have bought in the last year, just like ordinary shareholders are.

And could they have profited? I mean, did they miss opportunities to avoid being upside down? Did they ever use the fact that they have a better vantage point from which to decide to profit than ordinary shareholders do, to time trades so that they ended up avoiding being upside down, like ordinary shareholders presently are?

Just like ordinary shareholders, they could have sold, and in cases where they got paid with shares or bought shares, they could have made a profit sometime during the year.

But in actual fact, they have not sold a single share.

IMHO, that kind of puts the wood to the popular storyline doesn't it?

These guys aren't selling.

They are buying at prices that are no better than you or I, and they continue to buy.

So lets me invite you to ponder a few rather obvious questions, LOL:

Like:

If these guys are fleecing us, where are the sells?

If these insiders, privy to all kinds of info you and I are not privy to, are buying and never selling, what does that say about what they think about the future prospects of the company?

Do you folks think the insiders see prices falling from here?

Do you think they believe the contract for sale of output is fake?

Do you think they believe the assay info is pathetic?

Do you think they believe they are going to run out of money and have to sell out at fire sale prices?

Really?

If these guys are fleecing us, how is it that they are buying at prices that are no better than you or I have had to pay?

And again....they are not selling, are they?

How, exactly, does an insider use a company as an ATM machine if they never sell and if they buy at prices that are no better than ordinary people, who are not insiders, have to pay?

How?

How does this work, LOL?

If, in fact, SFMI insiders are not paying better prices and are not selling out to generate income, what evidence is there to support the allegations that we ordinary shareholders are being fleeced by the Quilliams?

Quote: Do we have ANY evidence that actually supports the popular storyline?

Just a single link would do, LOL

But wait.... what about the buy shown in the link describing insider transactions this year.... there is one entry that shows a buy made by David Bommarito on Dec. 6, 2010 at .019? Right?

The price was .19 that day, so isn't that a 10 fold advantage this insider got?

No. Its a typo, people.

Here's the actual SEC filing.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingPdf?FilingID=7595698

He bought at .19, not .019. Its a typo.

What the actual facts show is a bunch of insiders who are not using the company as an ATM machine. They are not using their insider position to enable them to buy at prices that are better than you and I.

For practical purposes, each of us could have bought the exact same number of shares on the same day as each of these guys did.

They have lost as much value from each buy as any one of us who could have bought at the same price levels and on the same days, and they have not sold any of their shares.

So, what I question is not the insiders, but rather the storyline.

None of the insiders benefited last year by by using their advantaged positions to have obtained shares at favored prices and then flipped the shares like the company is their own personal ATM machine.

No insider has illustrated that he lacks faith in the future prospects of the company by dumping shares.

The storyline that these guys have been running the company for their own benefit needs to have evidence supporting it for me to accept it, and given that the actual evidence contradicts that storyline, I have to question the storyline itself.

I am a daytrader. I love it when a company comes out with news that I can trade. So, I'm just like everybody else: I'm looking to make a quick buck and I dislike what has happened to this stock's price.

I could easily get on-board with the storyline and criticize the company for being mismanaged.

And to be honest, I do not understand why they have never milked their news the way a lot of other companies do. When I put money into this stock, I was counting on them doing so, LOL. I would have loved for SFMI to have done so because I could have made a lot of money milking this stock for all its worth. After all, I'm not a dolt. I understand where the storyline comes from. Heck, I share the pain. I understand it fully.

But the other day, I posted a facts laden post that eviscerated the argument that the assays of the piles are terrible. I needed to see for myself if the reason SFMI held back on the assays, (which they could have released last year, prior to the shareholder meetings), was that the assays of the piles were terrible, which would have explained why they held back on them.

Turns out, the assays were far from terrible.[/color] In actual point of fact, compared to company after company, they were tremendous.

So, with this present post, I am posting to burn to the ground the accepted storyline, because the facts do not support it.

I'm eviscerating the accepted storyline that this company is fleecing each and every one of us because the insiders are mismanaging the company and running it so that nobody but the insiders are making money owning the stock.

The facts simply do not support the popular storyline, people.

They just don't.

I want to make my money out of this puppy as badly as the next guy.

I want to be able to say, later in life, that I was in on the ground floor of a tremendous get-rich stock story.

So don't let my refusal to toe the line and get on-board with the storyline around here fool people. I think the news releases this company puts out are ridiculous. And the P.R. Guy is, IMHO, doing a far better job of screwing things up than improving shareholder value by correctly managing the release of company information. A third grader could write better news releases, in my opinion.

But as to whether this company is a disaster looking for a place to happen, the fact is that it is actually the exact opposite.

It is sitting on easy to access above ground piles that contain precious metal content that assays far better than the majority of mining companies out there.

That's a fact.

And this post that I made the other day hammered that fact home, folks:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=67234497

So, despite the dislike I have for the way news has been managed, the fact is:
-1- this company is fully reporting
-2- it has built a mill in record time,
-3- it has hired an extremely qualified geological professional to run the company,
-4- it is producing dore bars,
-5- and it has a contract with a buyer for the output of the mill.

Quote: The storyline that depicts the insiders using this company as an ATM machine and fleecing the average shareholder just is not supported by the publicly available evidence.

Simple as that.
Hope this helps.

:o)

Imperial Whazoo