"(W)e strive each year for continuous improvements in our governance structure and processes." (CIBC)

I'm looking for continuous improvement with regards to SPQ governance and process. One thing that Neil promised at the AGM is a better web presence. With regards to present SPQ transparency, SPQ's web presence has given us old NRs and not much else. Hopefully, a better web presence will not only given us more useful information but also more marketing punch. This will be an improvement.

Neil also promised at the AGM better investor relations (IR) with former SPQ president Bryan Wilson taking on this responsibility.

Jim Voisin did a good IR job up until February (?) but left for UC Resources. (By the way, look up and find out who was the President of UC Resources before Jim. ) Up until the IR news at the AGM, no one had replaced Jim as IR so we got info from an administrator. Our new IR person will hopefully be an improvement (although he fell asleep at the AGM).

Two more important points that came out of the AGM.

1) When I asked Neil Novak and Richard Hamelin who were the "institutional investors" wanting to see a reverse split (Resolution #12), they would not tell me or any of the other shareholders who were present. I would like to see transparency with such important issues. (The fact that there are no institutional investors at this time is another concern.)

2) When Neil Novak was asked about showing shareholders EM maps like those available to FWR and NOT shareholders (on the FWR and NOT websites), Neil responded that this information is "strategic". Hummmm. Think about that one. Should this very, very important information be given to shareholders/investors who own part of Spider Resources? And just importantly, what is the marketing and promotional impact of not making this information available? More transparency is need on this issue.

Finally, I think Neil Novak is doing a good job; but he can do a much better job. "Transparency" as part of good governance is key - and this also includes the actions of the Board of Directors. Assuming they are doing the best job for shareholders is very dangerous. Fortunately, everyone who couldn't get to the Toronto AGM, had a number of passionate shareholders interested in helping their Agoracom friends become wealthy by helping with the issue of "transparency".

Snug