Hi, Lara,

Thanks for attempting to elucidate the situation. I try to be open-minded and listen to all sides. Certainly, if it comes out that Magma or Ross Beaty has done anything unethical, I will certainly sell off all my shares in Magma and put them elsewhere. If the Icelandic people were downtrodden or oppressed people, I'd be a little more sympathetic (I may be wrong...but I don't see how at this point). The banking crisis in Iceland was brought on by crooked people who were already in Iceland. Not some evil outside force. Yes, Ross, aims high, but when you are dealing with risky business ventures which require tremendous capital outlays and initial investments before there is any payback, the stakes are high. This is not a short term, quick profit venture. Ross Beaty will probably be long gone before the investment in Orka ever starts showing the 1,000 times results he' talking about. Yes, he's approaching this as a business man, and all good business men try to get the best deal they can, but I'm sure there's room for negotiation if people feel they are treated unfairly.

Next, I ask the question: why did Ross get out of silver, copper, and gold when they proved his forte for over 30 years? If it were just the money, he would have been better just sticking with what worked for him all these years. Ross is sincerely (at least from my viewpoint) trying to develop clean alternative energy sources for the world as an over-dependence on oil and gas has left this world in a terrible mess. Geothermal makes sense (once again, from my humble standpoint). Many of the so-called environmentalists are using a flawed argument based on an argument of some mistakes made with the Geysers in California from nearly a century ago (nothing to do with Magma or other contemporary geothermal practices).

Next, if Ross were such a ruthless cut-throat, as some Icelandic people are trying to make him out to be, why would he donate millions of dollars for a biodiversity museum at UBC? And why would he set up an ecological foundation which collaborates with the top environmentalist and social activist in Canada? It just does not make sense. And, no, this is not some grand PR ploy; I can think of a lot more effective strategies. Ross walks his talk (once again, if proved wrong, I'll sell off EVERYTHING I've invested into Magma Enregy, but at this point, I'm not convinced).

It would seem (to me at least) that politics in Iceland is based on marriages of convenience. The centralist government had a coalition with the right until it was no longer convenient, and then did an about face and formed a coalition with the left. And, now, that marriage seems to be crumbling apart. Clearly, marriages of convenience not tied to a share vision are only transitory, at the best.

Such lack of clear, shared vision appears to be blatant in the blog comments posted by various protesters. Some protesters are arguing that geothermal is environmentally damaging to the local community, and yet others are arguing for national control of the resources. I'm very confused. Which is? What is the central point or premise of your argument? I've even read some comments in which the same person has presented one argument in one breath and then turned around to present the contradictory argument in the next breath. You cannot have it both ways.

Next, I absolutely cannot understand the anti-globalization movement. Every country engages in silly protectionism. Even Canada tries to protect the arts with CanCon laws and CRTC regulations that only subjects Canadian listeners to inferior musical content. People should have choices so they can improve their quality. But the moment the government starts limiting those choices for its people, I get scared. The government does have a role to provide quality of life and essential social services to it citizens, and people employed in those social service sectors should be treated fairly. But claiming ownership to resources when investment from outside into those veery sources is helping your nation prosper? I don't get it.

But I'm digressing, and perhaps this thread should be moved to another forum. This forum has to do with "breakouts" on the market...and we're way off topic.

So in short, I'll set you with a challenge: provide me with a stronger argument that Ross Beaty and Magma Energy is so bad, and if you can really convince me, I'll back out.

But I'm most certainly convinced at present!

PS...perhaps the moderator may wish to move this to a more appropriate HUB or forum, or just leave it here...I apologize for a long off-topic diatribe. Thanks!