Golden Kiwi,

You are quite right. Jim will not be answering my Q-Line call. I got an email from his office that gave the same reason you suggested.

Dave Webb, however, did respond.

Here, paraphrased, is what he said:

For many reasons, he generally avoids questions on share price. But he did say that there are many company's share prices that have not moved since the crash of late 2008, with no obvious single factor accounting for the price.

Although he acknowledged that share price is, for many, the most obvious yardstick, he didn't think management should be hug up on affecting its price.

He elaborated by pointing to a recent article from the University of Toronto’s Rothman business school. An analogy was between the stock market performance for companies and the betting spread for sports teams. The article referenced the real business (adding ounces, improving resource quality, advancing permits: improving the company) vs. the stock market (speculation on company’s performance: where participants can make money) to real sports (winning games, making it to sectional, divisional, and national championships: improving the team) vs. sports bets (where participants can make money).

Dave suggested that we all may know this intuitively and added that Jim can’t say anything about Kimber’s share price because he is on the Board of Directors.

Dave was right about that.

Cheers,

Baires