When you are discussing this stock and any actions that goes on with it, you continually forget the uniqueness of this stock and believe that you can efficeintly apply regular market aspects to it, not taking into account these rare unique qualities that are absent in most stocks. By doing this, you are leaving out a crucial factor of the stock that can and should influence the sp considerably in a positive manner, the tightly held situation. This is a very powerful attribute of this stock and there has to be some powerful opposing force with a well established intent, to even succeed in dropping it a bit, let alone 90%.

Unless you can account for every shareholder and every share and determine that no one would ever sell, I don’t think you can claim that regular market aspects don’t apply to this stock. Yes, it is held more tightly than other stocks, but nothing is bullet-proof, particularly in our current unforgiving market. It only takes one motivated seller if there are no buyers. Remember how it opened around 0.60 upon the release of the first drill results, only to bounce back up over a dollar?

Your comment about Venture stocks that over promise gets punished, is very correct,but I don,t believe I have ever seen them get punished like this on partial and incomplete results, the avenue is just not there to make a reasonable decision to sell, when information is incomplete. And when you see Anon and Jitney in there those days selling, thats not retail or the very little institutional holdings selling, it speaks of something else .

Many, many other stocks have been punished much worse. Look around. They’re everywhere. The one that jumps to mind is Canaco Resources that went from 6.00 to 0.27 because their maiden resource estimate of 1 million ounces failed to please the market. Plus CAN had nearly 0.50/share in cash (90-something million). So if a million ounce resource is being punished to the point that people are willing to sell it for less than the value of the cash the company has in the bank, what do you think the market will say about incomplete results that suggest no resource at all?

So you say the decline was predictable and that you knew in Nov. That was very good insight on your part and I don,t know how you could have come to that conclusion back then.

I didn’t know the drill results were going to be poor. What I did know was without a single drill result, St. Elias was trading like 60 million ounces had been discovered and drill results almost always disappoint the market. It didn’t take much imagination to guess which way the shareprice was headed if drill results missed the mark. I was actually a bit surprised when they did. I expected the results to be similar to Galway’s Vetas results.

And, having said that, I believe I may be correct in stating that you sold or were selling at that time, because if you knew then that a decline was inevitable you would have sold. And furthermore, I believe your posts then were not supportive, and when I think of it, why would they be supportive, the posts of yours should not have even been there if you had sold, for you remaning posting at the time and continuously if you held no shares, is senseless.And yet you remain here today, continuously questioning virtually every line I right and trying to discredit me. I will see someone short continuously negative post or attack the positive posters in these kind of circumstances, because they have an interest, and that is to get the sp as low as they can. And when you weed out the biggest portion of retail investors, like we have in this stock, that are not allowed to short or have the restriction of not allowed to short under $2, then again, this leaves the registered shorts belonging to big guys and rules out the illusion that a lot of selling has taken place.

Yes, I did sell, Sculpin, because I considered it too risky to hold. I didn’t know that a decline was inevitable. I knew a decline was inevitable if the drill results were poor. But the drill results could have been favourable and I might have left money on the table.

I’m sorry that you feel it’s senseless for me to have an opinion about this stock when I don’t hold shares. Believe it or not, I have opinions about other stocks I don’t hold too. I’m not trying to discredit you. Sometimes I call BS on you, just like you do me, because your posts are at times misleading. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having a discussion about it for the sake of clarity. This is a discussion board after all. Sorry if you don’t feel I am supportive enough of this stock and that I “attack positive posters.” I don’t consider my posts attacks. I try to be objective and realistic.

And I see you mention that I suggest the regulatories (its a new word made up by me, in case you question it), sustain the sp. Where did you ever get that idea? Indirectly though, its their job to stop manipulation and retain integrity in the markets, which should affect sp,s of stocks, especially when they are fundemently sound and have more money in the bank than what their market caps are. Who do you think you are fooling with these types of comments? The retail component of the markets are not as stupid as they used to be and more and more everyday are adding to the component. Sure, we may have been stupid in supporting this stock for the way things happened, but hindsight is a very beautiful thing, and with that hindsight, most of us still don,t believe how this could have happened with our SLI.

Who do I think I’m fooling with these types of comments? I assure you, Sculpin, that I have no intention of fooling anybody.