It will serve the Shareholders on this Message Hub best, if we zero-in on what we can do to put an end to our misadventures with Marquest and to stop them from ever reoccurring. But, before I go into that, I will point out where I overstated (not misstated) our case. Three messages ago, I concluded my message with the following sentence:

“Yet the Participants of all the five active funds (the “Limited Partners” who never heard of Fancamp) are the guys for whose benefit all those tens of millions of Fancamp shares are being sold in such haste and mindless fury.”

While I stand by the accuracy of the many things I’ve been saying on this subject, I question my choice of words, in this one instance. I believe my words were misleading, by the way I phrased them. I reached that conclusion on my own (without anyone complaining). I arrived at it by the means of applying the limited information I have and thinking about what’s possible and likely and what’s not possible and likely.

First, as a minor point, there’s not five, but at least six presently active “Super Flow-Through Limited Partnerships.” I found out by methodically going through Marquest website. When looking something up there, you need to be vigilant, being that important facts often are scattered about and not presented in the most logical order and not always placed in the most accessible and easy-to-find places. Also, keep in mind what I’ve already mentioned in a one of my previous messages on this subject. There are additional funds not presented on the website, (which states) “For tax information on funds not listed, please contact Client Services.”

Second, is my more important point: The words of my own that I’m questioning are whether or not “tens of millions of Fancamp shares are being sold in such haste and mindless fury.” Yes, it’s happening. But I doubt it’s happening all at once (as it would be easy to infer from the way I put it).

The irony is, the very fact that no one here can quite figure it out is, in of itself, an indictment of what’s going on. For good reason, it is at the root of all of our condemnations and denunciations. No matter how you slice it, there were materially important decisions that management made regarding how the new shares were financed and how they were to be indiscriminately dumped on the market. The fact that we don’t know all the materially important facts does not make it better for the Shareholders; it makes it all the worse and all the more indefensible.

I will stick to the plain facts and what we do know for sure:

#1) Fact: The tens of millions of shares that were repeatedly sold to Marquest “Super Flow-Through Limited Partnerships” wound up in the hands of investors who were not even informed that Fancamp shares were part of the portfolio they were sold. The “Offering Memorandum,” in all capital bold-faced type, states “THIS IS A BLIND POOL OFFERING.”

Informed Conjecture: Of course, the infinitely more responsible thing to do and the infinitely preferable thing to do is sell new shares, on the merits, to informed members of the investment community. Of course, there will never be a sufficient number of informed members of the investment community, if you make no serious effort to reach out to them (as Shareholders for Accountability at Fancamp repeatedly recommended and as those Shareholder recommendations were repeatedly ignored).

#2) Fact: Every one of the 22 or more “Super Flow-Through Limited Partnerships” has (or had) a firm “dissolution date,” before which the “General Partner” (the administrator of the fund) is (First) obligated to dump into the market (or into another Marquest fund) all the equities; and (Second) is obligated to “rollover” the proceeds into a “RRSP-eligible corporate-class mutual fund” (unrelated to mineral exploration).

Informed Conjecture: The tax shelter is automatically “dissolved” after the tax advantage has been captured. On occasion, it is conceivable, there possibly are intermediate steps taken within Marquest to recycle the “dissolved” shares between Marquest funds, before ultimately, dumping them on the market. So far as the “Super Flow-Through Limited Partnership,” the investor is taken out of the mineral exploration industry and “rolled-over” into a different industry with a different kind of tax advantage. Of course, it is infinitely stupid and infinitely irresponsible to sign up this kind of investor whose only commitment is the commitment to sell and move on to something entirely different.

3) Fact: Fancamp Shareholders are entitled to get all the materially important information about all the materially important events (contractual or otherwise). At the very least, The Blind Pool (Issue #1) and The Dissolution Date (Issue #2) contain materially important factual information that management is required to divulge publically before the Fancamp Shareholders ever get harmed by it.

Informed Conjecture: Fancamp’s regular issue of Flow-Through shares into a Blind Pool (Issue #1) and (Issue #2) The Dissolution Date of the Blind Pool are both materially important issues. Any information concerning those two issues that is relevant to Fancamp Shareholders is material information and—with all the relevant details—is required to be publically divulged. That includes, the number of shares, at whatever time span they’re liable to be indiscriminately dumped. Caused by this, the extent of the possible damage to the price of our stock is material information and is required to be publically divulged. As responsible investors, we should not allow ourselves to be put into the position that we’re desperately scurrying around trying to figure what’s going on, as we’re being hit by wave after wave of undefined and unexplained dumping.