And welcome to all of the new shareholders. I haven't posted here in a long time, since I was threatened with expulsion for not being booster of the current management group. I have, however been watching their continuing falure to live up to their promises, and their blaming of others. I don't generally look at or participate on any other board, I have a life.

I am not interested in the Macro picture of who is manipulating or shorting PMs, including SFMI (there are only about 5,000 people in the whole world that know about this little tiny, non producing exploration company), how it impacts all of the JPMs, or who is prognosticating about the future in whatever cristal ball they have. My interest is purely about how this company is ensuring maximun return for the all of the shareholders, outsiders as well as the insiders, in other words, us. I have been a shareholder in SFMI for more than 3 years, and am dissatisfied with the performance of the Management for the following reasons,

1. Although it may look as if they got a mine into production quickly in comparison with other startups, I think comparing the speed at which this group who stumbled onto a mountain of ore, sitting on top of the ground, just waiting for a mill to get to full production to a bare bones startup with all of the holes to be drilled, gathering proof of a viable producer and reports, to be a bad comparison.

2. I don't care what management has done, or not done in the past. The definition of an Entrepenour is a person who takes risk, and frequently fails before succeeding. I'm not selling, and neither is Spiny or Sinbob or any of you here. My concern, is that their plans are to maximize profits for themselves at the expense of all of the other shareholders, through several manipulations.

3. They have decided that the best way to reduce the outstanding shares is to spend 15% of the profits in a buyback. Seems reasonable on the surface, unless you understand the mechanices of shareholder value. Reducing the float by maybe1or 2% per year will only further concentrate ownership to those that remain. Good for them, you say. Statistical Analysis proves that buybacks have little impact on share price. I think this is important because they have initiated stock options. Options always go to management. So that any shares purchased on the open market will result in an (I believe) equivelant number of options being distributed to the insiders. More for them and less for us. That money could be spent in other ways, like a dividend or pursuing other mining opportunities.

4. How else could the float be reduced? A reverse split, 1 for 2, for example would result in quickly reducing th number of shares while insuring that the ownership % remains the same for all shareholders. When questioned about this, IR has said that it is complicated and I shouldn't bother my little head about it. This is important becase the price per share is determined by the number of shares, the profits per share, and one other thing. How investors who have the power to move a stock, whether they be shorters, or stock/hedge funds think. IS a companies' management friendly to shareholders. In other words, is it about everyone making money, or just them. Those of us who have been shareholders at these prices will surely make some money as they finally become a full production company. The point is how much, not if.

If you have a large stock position, and think that management should do a better job maximizing value for all shareholders, I would encourage you to make your feelings known, to PQ et al. For those of you who went to Idaho, and came away with a great impression of mangement, take it from someone who has bs'ed with the best of them, the best con artists always come off as trustworthy, upstanding citizens, if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to pull off the con.

Iggy