If memory serves me right the r/s was first raised by some insiders at least three to four years ago. In fact I remember a number of posts not only here but on SH where JD got pretty uptight whenever it was raised. His comment then was he was close to Neil and there was no way it was happening, at that point in time we were sitting at just over 300 mill shares. Then a few years ago Neil and the BOD tried it again that time we had around 400 + mill shares out, and that time they were defeated by the shareholders. The shareholder charge against the r/s was headed up by Snug and JD. Though I haven't read anything from JD I'm assuming that Snug from his post may be in favour of the 1:10r/s, Snug if you're not in favour then I apologise.

IMO a r/s makes sense, but not at 1:10 , at that level I'd be against it , what would be in the better interest of the retail shareholders would be a 1:5 r/s. I agree we have way to many shares out but you have to ask yourself who gains on a 1:10 r/s, IMO it sure isn't the retail shareholder. It's going to be the ones they go to on a PP, cos you know that's coming next. There can be no question that Spider is going to be taken out of the game, by someone, and Neil wants to position the company, hopefully to get the best deal for the shareholders. Though I'm pretty sure if you'd talked to the FWR shareholders a year before the Cliffs deal was announced they'd have said the same about Mac Watson, and look what happened to them. It behoves us to ensure that Neil and his BOD understand that a 1:10 r/s is not fair or acceptable to the retail shareholder, if you don't believe me do the math and then do the possible projections. One could assume if this goes through for Spider then next one to try it will be KWG. Call his office and tell him your opinion or fax them, whether you agree with the r/s at 1:10 or agree with my suggestion at 1:5 you need to voice your opinion.

GLTA

Joe