Let's see, Kimber announced its board shakeup in an April 18 news release. Stock closed at .21 that day.

Kimber closed at .25 April 22. It closed at .14 May 13.

I'd call that a worse than lukewarm reaction.

The optimism that Kimber will leap into production, skipping traditional intermediate steps, fails to account for how Kimber will raise the money to do so.

I guess this could be a misunderstood success story in waiting. I also guess that could have been said all the way down from a $1-plus share price not that awful long ago.

Griping about naked shorts and the like isn't going to feed the bulldog, just like gold bulls whining about price manipulation by the COMEX et al seems to accomplish squat.

I'm just glad I was able to get ride of half my position at what turns out to be a 50 percent higher price. I wish I'd sold it all. I also wish I could share the optimism of some posters here, but to be realistically optimistic one has to have occasional reinforcement in the way of positive moves and events. Kimber is producing neither.

That crashing share price speaks volumes. If it's just naked shorters, and Kimber is such a great prospect, a larger mining company, a producer, theoretically could scoop up the shares cheaply in the open market and have it all for under $12 million U.S. per Yahoo financial numbers. I know, I know, Puplava and the like hold a lot of shares and wouldn't sell this low. Or would they? More to the point, why don't they buy huge numbers of shares here if the risk-reward is skewed so far in the direction of reward?

If an acquiring company would step up, buy out Kimber, and throw in the cash to start mining, then, voila, a cash cow. So, why isn't anyone snapping up this bargain?

Or maybe it isn't such a great prospect after all in the minds of the people who know the mining business best. That's the implied message of the continuing share price decline.