While I generally like the strong statement the GRZ CEO made, if this ends badly I think any Grz shareholder should reasonably ask him what he (the CEO) thought the reason for the hold up of the Initiation Act was? As with Kry management, in regards to shareholder transparency, everyone seems to have had their heads in the sand, either no one knew what was going on or no one was giving straight answers. Personally, I think they didn't know what was going on, but I wouldn't be surprised to see management on the wrong end of a shareholders suit, whether or not it is fair.