Hello Balance.

Look up the keyword “salesmanship” on Amazon, under the “Books” category. The result is 7,025 books on the subject. The seven salesmanship reforms I gave are absolutely essential and are the absolute minimum. I only scratched the surface. My letter was one page long. The “Addendum” was an additional two and a half pages long.

It is my belief that the shareholders deserve the attention of our illustrious leader for the five to ten minutes it would take for him to re-familiarize himself with the same “Addendum” I sent to him for the fourth time (and to which he has stonewalled us yet again). Sales leadership does not deserve the five to ten minutes (in total) it did not get. It deserves five to ten hours (not minutes) every day (not once only).

Except for you, every one of the more than forty shareholders who’ve ever communicated with me on the subject strenuously advocates our desperate need for the same kind of program to boost the share price that I’ve put forward. So far, I merely introduced the subject. Spending five to ten minutes reading about the most basic and elementary principles of salesmanship and company promotion hardly would tax the intellectual capacity of any executive who has any true merit.

We have no physical product to sell for the foreseeable future. Obviously, day after day, year after year, our cash flow has been—and will continue to be—negative. So far as our valuable assets in the ground—which make up the one (but gigantic) thing we’ve got going for us—Fancamp can no longer afford to stay on the sidelines. There is no controversy whatsoever in the simple ABC pro-shareholder qualities I did my best to explain.

Instead of directing your discourtesy at me, you would serve yourself (and others) better by spewing your venom in the opposite direction. Jean Lafleur’s obstinate stonewalling and disrespect (whether directed at me or whether directed at the other diligent shareholders) are hardly the best qualities of his leadership. Take a good look at what kind of boorish behavior you’re advocating.

I know it’s a plain fact that every other company on earth seeks out and welcomes comments and opinions from shareholders and potential shareholders alike. Compared to the urgency of raising our share price, my commentary was modest and, if anything, too short (and too gentle in its criticism).

You’ve written, “There is not one executive that I know that would consider such a long winded letter as a serious means of communication. Seriously.” OK, you’ve emphasized the word “seriously.” I say, OK let’s be “serious.” Search high and low. You will not find one reputable public company executive who is not delighted to converse, at length, with shareholders, especially if the subject matter is timely and has priority.

After all these years, our share price doesn’t deserve five to ten minutes of “serious” consideration by our CEO? Five to ten minutes to think about doing something about our share price is too challenging? All those great number of minutes will be too exhausting a use of his brain capacity to be “a serious means of communication”? How many minutes would you allot before unbearable mental fatigue sets in? To fit your definition of “serious,” all the efforts made to date to raise the share price have been “serious” and are beyond reproach?