They are very selective in their information. Page 5, Shareholder Value, is a joke as the share price is back to Aug 2009 levels. The decision to go mining given today's snapshot of production has diluted shareholder value significantly and burned through a tonne of dough. How is increasing market cap significantly while issuing cheap paper increasing shareholder value? It is doing the exact opposite. San Gold has had an inverse relationship to the rest of the market since July 2010 and given production guidance there is no reason it shouldn't.

So, ultimately the bad decisions of the previous CEO and misguided BOD has cost Ginn his job and all the promises of production, bulk samples and share price get tossed so the new guy starts with a clean slate and new play book. (Think Leafs) Meanwhile, the biggest non aggregate beneficial owner gets a controlling stake on the cheap and a plant at the head of the company.

The events over the last 8 months seem awfully strange as does the shocking performance of the sp. I'm not buying it, starting with the BS surrounding the revised 43101 for the TSX listing and the 130 million bought deal being scaled back to 80 million overnight. The burn rate suggests they've seen lots of ore and Hugh's bill suggests there's probably enough high grade core to produce 40000 ounces alone. I think there must be something in those shoreline basalts and NOT disclosing the 007 bulk sample or even reporting any production from it raises some eyebrows considering they whipped off the Hinge bulk sample in what seems like light speed relative to today's 007 mystery.

Meanwhile, funds are dumping the dog chasing alpha elsewhere while all the paper is being funnelled somewhere upto 30% below bought deal levels. At least they could have put a glossy of George in the literature. The new guy doing the presentation, John O'Sullivan, should have been more thorough. A positive is it looks like Boulay's off the job.