I have been a sharholder of FNC on and off for 4 years. In that time I have had the "priveledge" of talking to Peter on several occassions.

Based on those discussions and watching how he has mismanaged FNC, it is my opinion that he should be a university professor not a president of a junior mining company.

It seems that he uses his position to experiment with his theories on prospective targets in order to satisfy his own interests and ego instead of doing what is right for shareholders. It is like a game to him.

Until now, I thought of him as an absent minded professor along the lines of Jacques Colouseau (Peter Sellers). But now that he has knowingly broken the rules it is evident that he is more dangerous than I had thought.

At the very least, Peter should resign based on his deceipt and dishonesty in this instance.

Come on folks, how can you continue to support a BoD that goes along with this behaviour and refuses to accept their legal obligations? For the BoD to have removed Granger because he simply fulfilled his responsibilities and objected to the illegal actions of the President speaks volumes of the current BoD.

If I had any faith in the securities regulators I would be expecting them to step in and discipline the entire BoD and ban Peter for life. However they have proven to me in the past that they too are ineffective and useless. (that is a long story...it is a beaurocracy right?).

Someone on Agoracom questioned the qualifications of the new slate. I suggest you do more research because they are a very impressive group.

Please vote for the new slate so we can have a chance at increasing the SP and making some money.

SN