There are many interesting aspects to this update. Maybe some good. But also much not so good. It also demonstrates how clueless we shareholders have been. While we have pined away for years praying for the interest of even one potential big partner, desperately trying to figure out various small funding schemes- there was actually not just one, but two giant mining firms that we were negotiating with all along. And the company ultimately blew it with both. I agree with VP that by a process of elimination that Prospect One was probably Coldeco. And so there may have been external factors beyond the company's control. But since we don't exactly know the time line- it's possible that this breakdown in negotiations occurred before the current Chilean turmoil. And this is in BG's telling. We really don't know what factors led to the breakdown. In any case- a failure. We are not really given any information about "Prospect Two"- which exited negotiations after praising what we had at HM. Why? It's almost as if a sentance is missing- maybe edited out. As shareholders, we are owed an explanation. And what about what was going on in the interim. I have asked repeatedly about whether we were seeking partners. I guess the answer is that we were- at least Prospects One and Two. But was that to the exclusion of others? - with other opportunities being missed while being focused on these shiny objects. Obviously this was not handled properly. The bottom line- our bottom line-(pretty pathetic)  speaks for itself. 

And speaking of being clueless- as VP has questioned- where has the rest of the BOD been? We know where one is- namely JB- who has been on the outs- at whose hands and why? He is the one person who has worked tirelessly with more than full time devotion to LBSR- not only with commitment but with knowledge and uparalleled expertise. Again- as shareholders we are owed an explanation. But what about the others? Do they even have a say or even a vote as to what happens? I'm not sure that they do.

I would say one positive- are the new claim acquisitions. I agree it is helpful that the CA agreements now need not be so "onerous". I think the CA agreements should be better understood as noncompete agreements rather than confidentality agreements designed to prevent potential investors from turning around and grabbing nearby claims not yet secured by LBSR. JB had long had this valid concern. Having now secured these claims, this is no longer as critical and, to the degree that it was an impediment to some investors- that should be now eliminated. For example, I assume the Company can now more freely show off impressive ZTEM finding of the surrounding caldera- including the new ZTEM reanalysis which may favorably impress some prospective partners. Previously this information probably had to be kept close to the vest out of fear that a prospective partner might themselves turn around and secure those claims for themselves.

But again- as others have said- the acquisition of those claims may be good- but their early development is not. We need to stay focused on the central HM target and get drilling started. We don't need these new Board members to develop or promote a grand long term development scheme. At least not yet. What we need now- as always- are funds for immediate drilling- a goal not clearly stated anywhere in the long update. If and when this stabilizes the company- we can then move on to develop the greater caldera.

Finally- in his opening statement- "It is times like these that present the most favororable condition"- did BG move from the previously stated position that we must wait for the POC to rise before we can be open for business? A little unclear- but I hope that is the case. The bad news is that we are not going to be drilling tomorrow. We can only hope that a vigorous effort is about to be made to get those drills turning. And maybe that effort might be prodded along with not only more shareholder information- but more shareholder involvement.