Hello Bluebird.

As we all know (or should know by now), you are a man of few words. Of course, we can take those words beyond their minimalism because, undoubtedly, they’re a product of deeper thought.

In your last message, under the title “FNC,” you asked “In play?” That’s your message in its entirety. To me, those two words express the whole Fancamp story so far as the difficult and vexing and more sweeping question that troubles all the shareholders (or, at least, all those who bought for more than inventive and ingenious tax advantages).

In answering your question (as to whether or not our stock is “in play”), the key word in my reply is “disconnect.” In our earlier debates, I mentioned, several times, the disconnect between the share price of Fancamp in contrast to its inherent true value, especially in regards to Magpie. On this Message Hub, I documented and added up the out-of-this-world divide—“the disconnect”—between the mathematical reality of the what values shares in Fancamp contain compared to the investment community’s short-sighted determination to ignore a reality which is as certain—and is as immovable—as the mountains that contain our mineral resources.

http://agoracom.com/ir/Fancamp/forums/discussion/topics/584408-discussion-and-analysis-is-august-26-2013/messages/1833981#message

http://agoracom.com/ir/Fancamp/forums/discussion/topics/584408-discussion-and-analysis-is-august-26-2013/messages/1834061#message

So what does “in play” mean in terms of today’s market (which is disconnected from reality)? As do shares of all the Venture Exchange companies, shares of Fancamp, from time-to-time, make distinct moves (over the last few years, in our case, losing more than 95 percent of their value). Our shares will continue to be “in play” and will continue to move from time-to-time. I don’t pretend to know the days that will happen. But I do predict we’ll more likely be adding some cents to the upside than subtracting cents to the downside.

You can reach that conclusion by only considering the fact that mineral resource stocks move in tandem (unless something specific captures the investment community’s imagination). Lately, the profitability of mining most mineral resources has become marginable at best. History teaches us, when the market cycle becomes that negative, unfailingly (every single time without exception), the cycle turns around. Moreover, there’s built-in leverage in buying the companies as opposed to buying the underlying commodities. A ten percent uptick in a commodity can bring a thousand percent uptick in the overall profitability (both present and future) of the companies mining it.

So, even looking at it by only considering our industry group, Fancamp, very much, remains “in play.” So far as precisely timing the market, I don’t know how to do it. And I seriously doubt the claims of those who claim they can.

In spite of almost anything management does or does not do, I concede that we likely will, in the coming months, be pleased some cents will be added to our share price. I also concede that following how that transpires will teach us something. However, it’s important that we don’t allow ourselves to be distracted by the daily price gyrations and the daily games the market plays. Aside from the fact that the market has a list with Fancamp labeled as a member of the mineral resource group, in every other respect (in regards to every single thing that makes us special), we are disconnected from the market. There’s nothing remotely having any significance to any of us (and worth more than passing attention) compared to that.

It is inevitable that at some undetermined time in the future, Fancamp’s properties will become connected to the reality of their value in the billions of dollars (not the present 12.62 million Canadian dollars market capitalization). That’s when we’ll look back at the price targets repeatedly being given here and elsewhere as having been laughingly too timid.

In the future, what will we think about our present conversations about price targets under a dollar a share? Will we continue to debate a share price moving a few cents here and there as demonstrating we’re “in play”? If we don’t stand in the way of nature taking its course, will our shares be nine cents when our NSR income exceeds nine cents a year? That’s not counting our billions of dollars in property values (primarily Magpie) beyond that. Will the valuation be nine dollars (not cents)? Will it be ninety dollars (not nine dollars, not nine cents)?

When you believe and understand that Fancamp’s present share price has nothing whatsoever to do with the resources it owns (especially Magpie), then it is an exercise in delusional self-hypnosis to use the present share price as a valid reference point. Not to put too fine a point to it, our share of Magpie is our share of a mountain of world-class resources. The value of world-class mineral resources is not denominated in millions of dollars (by no stretch of the imagination anything close to 12.62 million dollars). The value of world-class mineral resources is denominated in billions (not millions) of dollars. Look it up. There’s a one thousand fold difference between millions and billions.

I made a prediction that we will move up, in the months coming up, a few cents here and there. I also said I cannot be more accurate than that, so far as the timing. On top of that, I’ll make another prediction. Our present share price is—total—nine cents. In our not-too-distant lifetimes, a nine cents a share price change in one day’s morning or afternoon trading will be considered inconsequential, a change hardly worth more than a moment’s attention. Compared to nine cents, one morning’s (or one afternoon’s) ninety cents price change will cause a few raised eyebrows (but not more than that).