Good morning D,

Regarding this portion of your post to me may I please clarify or perhaps expand on my position regarding Sage.

A] You said,"lets be clear here i do not think that sage is hiding anything right now this is not the point of my post at all, but jerry you are often giving the impression by your post that the management can do whatever they want if they feel its better for them".

I actually disagree with the first part of the above sentence. Clearly Sage Gold is "hiding" something [note the quotes] in the sense that for 'tactical and future planning' and other reasons there is no need to 'show their hand'. A good example would be telling everyone that they are going to pick up more acreage at a certain location, before they actually do. Common sense says, often says,'silence is golden' in much of what they are trying to accomplish.

In the second portion of your above sentence D, I believe you are partially correct and partially wrong. Management can in fact do what they think is necessary and they can do it when, how, and in the way they want to. I would include if they want to as long as it is legal. This is not arrogant this is what companies do and most of the time shareholders have nothing to say about anything EXCEPT "perhaps" at a annual shareholders meeting or if charges are filed against a particular company. You fellas and gals have to understand they, not WE, absolutely run the company for better or worse and again that goes for any other publically or privately held corporation. They hire. They fire. They make good or bad decisions and no one that posts on Agoracom or SH has one little thing to say about it. D, I don't know how to say that any stronger. For some here, it is a case of having a problem with authority. It sounds arrogant on my part to phrase it that way but I know that, that is a fact of life in industry. Most of you at your jobs do not dictate policy, so it is much less so for investors in your respective companies.

The last portion of that sentence, where you say 'management can do whatever they want if it feels good to them', is incorrect D. It is not a case of "if it feels good to them" it is as I just said above. I have twice written the management and I copied the CEO and Bill and Mike about something I thought needed to be changed or done and ZIPPO, NADA, ZILCH was done about what I tried to convey to them. Yes, I got a polite response back because I wrote them properly. However, right or wrong, the suggestions were NOT taken. D, just try and talk with the CEO of IBM and just try and make a suggestion. Give yourselves a break guys/gals. It AIN'T gonna happen.

B] You also stated that "whats better for them is not necessarely whats better for shareholders because no one is investing whit the exact same goal and thats the reason why the full transparence is a must and is non negociable whit a public corporation and anybody who will say the opposite is wrong to the bone".

D, Ultimately what is better for them IS what is better for us share holders. They will glean the lions portion but we will do well IF they are successful and IF it is meant to be, so I have to again respectfully disagree with you. True, each of us has our own goals but that is a private matter that has nothing to do with the company. You state that 'full transparancy is a must and not negotiable with a public corporation and anyone that says the opposite is wrong to the bone" That D, is a to general a statement because no company is going to be so transparant that the competition knows what is going on and also for other very valid reasons. That IS the real world and that is a non-negotiable statement.

D, You know that if Sage was sitting at $1.50 and heading north, no one would care about transparancy or company policy. Sorry guy but all the comments of late can be reduced to this. "I am not making money with this play AND in fact I am loosing money so I am going to moan and groan about it and find fault with Sage on some point ot other AND anyone who says the opposite about that is wrong to the bone.

Respectfully submitted the both you and the forum,

Jerry Francis