Great post Bullyboy, you hit the nail on the head. I believe and hope the majority of retail investors have spoken clearly via their votes, namely that they believe the current board has acted with care, diligence and foresight over the preceding year to ensure shareholder value in the long term. This is what I believe the majority of shareholders want.

There is little doubt what Rosseau et el are attempting to do here and your comments that they want a majority of holdings in the Ring of Fire rings true. I have no problem with a majority shareholder having representation on the board of a company they have heavily invested in, but they do not deserve to control the whole company when it is the retail investor that are in fact, the majority shareholder. And in this case it is clear that the retail investor does not want Rosseau running the show.

It is also clear that Noront management felt Rosseau and company should be allowed some representation on the board, Noront management did after all sit down at the table and attempted to work out an honorable compromise by allowing two spots on the board for Rosseau. (May not have had a choice) Why would Rosseau reject such an offer and instead engage Noront management and shareholders in such a disruptive proxy battle. If all Rosseau wanted was to be able to protect their investment and have a representative say in the future direction of Noront. I think two spots on the board would have accomplished this. As you indicated Rosseau, did not want this, they wanted the whole pie or the biggest slice in the Ring of Fire.

I do not think we should become complacent over what is happening here and your post has clearly drawn attention to the character of those attempting to take control of NOT and their possible motives for doing so.

Relic