Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
According to the Niostar "audited Financial Statements " Niostar was incorporated in Ontario on November 8, 1996. (Under Description of Business)
Frankly I think that Dan is out of his element.
As I recall Audited Financial Statements must start with audited and confirmed information. If for some reason audited data is not available to the current Auditor "qualified" Financials may be issued. Essentially explaining the "qualification". If I recall correctly the latest Niostar FS are without qualification.
Thank you. Well written post that IMO accurately represents the status of the Company s efforts.
Most likely the "summer doldrums" - many people are on vacation etc.
Also not much for Sarissa Investors and potential Investors to get excited about. The Company is not providing any updates as to their progress. Management is completely silent and the PPS has dropped from it s previous atrocious levels to the present atrocious level.
I must agree with much of your assessment.
When Dan came on board in September 2014 there seemingly was a good plan that was going to be followed. If the Company had followed this plan there is a very good reason to believe that it could have led to a very different outcome that is presently being provided.
The Shareholders are very much left in the dark as to what went wrong as the Company s Management has gone silent.
I saw this along the way and thought that it was an interesting read and well worth sharing.
Rick Rule's 10 Steps to Successful Natural Resource Investing.
Successful speculation in junior resource stocks involves solving a fundamental riddle. How do you anticipate exploration success before the financial community reacts to the success?
The current bear market in precious metals gives you one leg up, as out-of-favor investments tend to have fewer specialists involved in the analysis of the companies in the sector.
Another advantage is gained through diversification. Placing all of your eggs in one basket often breaks your basket. While diversification does not ensure a profit nor guarantee against a loss, we always prefer a group of intelligently selected speculations to one large bet, no matter how compelling the story.
A contrarian, countercyclical orientation helps, as well. Avoid, when possible, the “herd mentality” of buying during roaring bull markets and selling at the depth of bear markets.
In exploration and speculation, success has typically followed those who use the best tools with consistent discipline. In the following pages, you’ll find some of these tools. The answers to the following ten questions can help you decide if you want to bother following, much less buy, a specific stock.
Step 1:“What is the current liquidation value of your company versus the market capitalization?”
Compare the company’s actual value if auctioned off tomorrow against the value the market places on all of its outstanding shares. If the market capitalization (‘cap’) is greater than the liquidation value, there may be a “rat in the feed bag.”
Speculation can’t stand on one leg alone. You have to forecast both the upside and downside. When promoters are trying to sell a stock, you’ll hear how precious metals will soon soar, how exploration will soon hit the Mother Lode, and how their promotion will boost the stock’s price.
That’s all great, but we have to weigh all of that against the downside, and value is the scale we use to do so. Nothing reduces risk like plain old value. If a company is not in a viable business, there’s no reason to buy it.
A company is only worth what it owns. Add up all the current assets (such as cash), subtract the liabilities, and add the liquidation value of the company’s projects. Liquidation value is what the projects would bring, as-is, in a sale today.
What is the market cap? For a rough estimate, multiply outstanding shares by the current market price. With 10 million shares outstanding at $2.50 per share, the market capitalization is $25 million. If this company has $5 million in cash and no debt, its net financial assets are 20 per cent of market cap.
For example, assume the company owns four exploration properties. With a cold and steely eye, assign each of them a value (this is where the analysis of a seasoned economic geologist comes in handy).
Now, add them all up. We’ll say in this example the properties are worth an estimated $12.5 million, so with the $5 million in financial assets, a liquidation value of $17.5 million, versus a market cap of $25 million.
If the management can answer the other questions well, this could be a sensible speculation. More often than not, however (especially in bull markets), we find market caps exceeding liquidation values by an uncomfortable amount.
Step 2: “Tell me about your management team and directors, especially their past success in mining and markets.”
Why do we need to understand the track record of the technical team, the directors, and the dominant shareholders? While deposits are discovered, a mine must be built. It takes technical prowess to turn a mineral deposit into a producing mine. It takes financial prowess to access the capital so crucial to mining, so the management team must include experienced and proven fundraisers.
Do their skills fit the job? If the team cut its teeth strip-mining oxide gold deposits in Nevada, it may break those teeth on an underground silver, lead, zinc sulfide deposit in Peru. We favor teams who stick to their areas of expertise: highly skilled exploration teams that decide they are going to become mine-builders and operators concern us.
We prefer they sell to experienced operators, instead. The reverse can hold true, as well: mine operators are often poor mine finders. The tasks do not resemble each other, and the mindset that is successful in one field is often unsuited to the other.
It is not enough to make a mine; we want to make money.
Look at the controlling shareholders’ track record, as well. Have they made money for investors in previous deals? It is not enough to make a mine; we want to make money. Be picky here, too. Can the dominant entrepreneur transfer his or her experience to the project at hand? While past performance is never a guarantee of future results, we always favor teams and controlling investors who have a history of success.
Finally, but importantly, are the insiders at the company major shareholders? We want key executives who stand to get rich off the company’s equity, not live well off a salary. Key executives need sufficient desire and drive to succeed, and should be focused on this company, not trying to run four different ones. We want the insiders to be just as keen as we are to see share prices increase.
We prefer to get to know management teams over time, and along the way, perform low-level background checks on their credibility, career background, personality wrinkles, etc. We also try to visit the corporate offices to gauge how cash is used on items that don’t generate shareholder value.
Step 3: “How are you going to make me money on this deal, and when will I make it?”
This is the question the promoters want you to ask, but make sure you control the conversation so they actually answer it. I once heard a stockbroker explaining a venture capital investment in a technological process. One potential investor asked, “How does the process work?” The broker replied, “It works fine!” Beware of such answers.
Make the promoter explain in detail how the company’s exploration activities will increase both shareholder value and stock price. Why these questions? We want to understand what sequence of events management believes will occur over time, and how that will affect share prices.
We must assign probabilities to the outcomes forecast and understand their timing and sensitivity. If management does not have a plan outlined, it is probably too early to buy. If the company refuses to keep us informed, or if they promise but do not deliver, we must consider selling the stock. If management does not have a geological theory with a plan to explore and prove it, it is probably too early to buy. If the financial or discovery results are below what we have been led to expect, we should sell the stock.
Step 4:“What are the company’s goals and what strategies will it use to reach them?”
Thousands of public companies specializing in precious metals exploration litter the investment landscape. The vast majority have failed. Many “penny miners” have, at best, only sketchy goals; many have none. It comes as no surprise when a company that has no goals fails to achieve anything.
Ask about the intended results on a per-share basis.
Will the company’s expressed goals increase share prices? Do the company’s goals seem reasonable? If the answers are “yes,” then ask how the company’s strategy fits its goals. What is their track record for meeting their goals (as a company and a management team)? Are their backgrounds suited to their strategies? When a company expresses goals, make them get specific. Ask about intended results on a per-share basis. What do you care if cash flow doubles and issued shares increases tenfold? Will the company’s expressed goals increase share prices? Some entrepreneurs simply seek to increase the assets they’re managing to secure their own cash flow.
Do the company’s goals seem reasonable? Will they raise share prices if they meet them? IF the answers are “yes,” then ask if the company’s strategy fits its goals. Many companies look like Don Quixote on his battle mule.
Their goals sound grand but they have no clue how to reach them. Measure their goals against the backdrop of the people. What is their track record for meeting goals? Have they succeeded in similar endeavors? Are their backgrounds suited to their strategies?
Step 5: “How much money do you have, how much money do you need to succeed, and how are you going to get it?”
While no strategy or capital structure guarantees a successful outcome, mineral exploration and production is a capital-intensive business: no capital, no business!
Diligent investors will compare the amounts spent by the company on non-project overhead compared to exploration activities, and avoid those where the overhead spend is out of proportion to exploration expenditures.
Start with current assets: cash, stock of other issuers, treasuries, bank deposits, inventories, prepaid expenses, and the like. Then deduct current liabilities. This gives you a rough idea of the net working capital.
Get a detailed description of the monthly (or at least annual) “burn rate”. What does it cost for rent, utilities, salaries, promotion, professional fees, listing expenses, etc.? Then superimpose projected exploration expenditures on a monthly basis.
If the company has debt, add in debt service payments as well.
If the company has debt, add in debt service payments as well. Diligent investors will compare the amounts spent by the company on non-project overhead compared to exploration activities, and avoid those where the overhead spend is out of proportion to exploration expenditures.
Finally, where will they get the money they need? Years ago at a gold mining conference, I spoke to an erstwhile promoter who did not know my face. I asked him where he would solve his working capital problems and he informed me that a “hot” west coast broker named Rick Rule would raise all the money he needed at much higher share prices. Imagine his surprise when I identified myself and explained the likelihood of his imagined financing taking place.
Make sure management owns LOTS of stock and stands to get rich if they make you money. Self-interest is the market’s sharpest spur.
When companies detail their financing plans, ask what conditions apply to the receipt of funds. Decide for yourself whether the companies will receive the necessary cash infusions and on what terms. If possible, get the names of their financing sources, and then contact those sources to verify that the capital is available. See if the preconditions and terms match the company’s own understanding.
Step 6:“Who owns this company? How much did they -- or will they -- pay for it, and when can they sell it?”
Make the company explain its capitalization history. If there were escrow or founders’ shares – shares issued for $0.01 to early insiders – who got them for what service and when will they be free to trade them? Determine at what price every financing has taken place.
Is the stock from those financings already freely trading, or can it hit the market later with the possibility of depressing share prices? How many options and warrants are outstanding? At what price can holders exercise them?
In other words, is the price asked now reasonable, given what others have paid? If the company recently issued shares at a price well below current market price, they made an unflattering public pronouncement about their opinions of the shares’ value. If insiders bought at prices well above current market, that might tell a different story.
Make sure management owns LOTS of stock and stands to get rich if they make you money. Self-interest is the market’s sharpest spur. Successful speculators back owners, not employees.
Step 7:“Who else will you tell this story to, how will you tell them, and when?”
Promotion often makes the difference between success and failure. Promotion is crucial in capital-intensive businesses because it raises subsequent financing with less dilution and increases liquidity and share prices.
Since exploration companies seldom pass out gold watches to 30-year shareholders, you want increasing share prices.
Pin down the promoter:
Who is the audience? What is the message? Who is the messenger? Do the three mix? What is the promotional budget? Is that sufficient? How will the promoter raise additional capital? At what price and from whom? Make the company, preferably its promoter, detail its promotional plan. Who is the audience? What is the message? Who is the messenger? Do the three mix? What is the promotional budget? Is that sufficient? How will the promoter raise additional capital? At what price, and from whom?
Exploration companies need to adequately fund their promotional budget. They need to schedule at least two management “road shows” that include Toronto, New York or London. They should also organize at least one annual tour of the company’s focus properties for analysts. North American companies that do not appear at the major “gold shows” or large natural resource conferences are at a great disadvantage when it comes to promoting themselves.
Promotion is crucial in capital-intensive businesses because it raises subsequent financing with less dilution and increases liquidity and share prices.
Institutional investors finance exploration, but retail investors provide market liquidity. Promoting to only one constituency is a flawed strategy. Retail promotion strategies need to take into account that Canada has 35 million residents while the US has 315 million. Does the company spend their promotion dollars in markets that have the money?
Many Canadian companies know little about US securities regulations. Certain types of promotion may violate US regulations, which have historically become more restrictive each year.
Make sure the promoter understands and complies with federal and state laws. If a promoter is not aware of the regulations and/or does not have concrete plans for compliance, forget about their stock.
Step 8:“What can go wrong, how will I know what is going wrong and what will you do if it goes wrong?”
If company management cannot name at least three things that could go wrong, they have not thought through their enterprise. Make them describe their three worst fears for you.
Ask the promoter to describe specifically how you as a shareholder will get negative information and warnings. Ask what signs you should look for and how you will get information that will help you keep tabs on and assess these risks on an ongoing basis.
Step 9:“Who’s buying the beer?”
If a company has answered these questions reasonably well, get to know the promoter personally. No company will ever answer every question perfectly, but candor and reasonable responses will tell you who to spend more time with. As you build a bond with the promoter, get him or her to tell the real story.
Since your interrogation took control of the promoter’s spiel, you have helped order his or her thoughts about the company. Now, let the promoter lapse into “streams of consciousness,” and listen carefully for tidbits of information you would never get from the canned presentation.
Step 10: “Where can I learn more?”
If you are still interested, this could be a great company. Retrieve their annual and quarterly reports. All public Canadian companies’ reports and filings can be found at www.sedar.com. Read what they hoped to accomplish and compare that to their actual accomplishments.
Find analyst and newsletter write-ups on-line, as well as the company’s press releases. One final trick: Summarize your understandings in writing and see if you can get the promoters to accept your summary as accurate. Make them accountable for their representations.
One Final Trick: Summarize your understandings in writing and see if you can get the promoters to accept your summary as accurate.
Many of you will read this section and decide that all of this interrogation and research is more work than you want to spend on each opportunity that interests you. You may be delighted to delegate the work to a broker or portfolio manager with a technical and financial background in the resource sector. Others will be up for the challenge and will put in the required effort to become self-educated about their potential investments.
One definition of luck is: when preparation meets opportunity. If you (or your broker) prepare yourself with the information discussed above, you will be in a much better position to pursue opportunities that arise in the resource sector.
For those who decide to utilize a broker to get answers to these questions on your behalf, remember that it is this type of individualized service that differentiates a full-service broker from an online, discount broker.
Happy hunting!
Rick Rule
for The Daily Reckoning
Rather than individuals "speaking to the Company" one on one and being supplied "IR information" of some sort I would think that it would be in the Company s best business interests to utilize a public forum to supply information to everyone that may be interested.
Let's see - Sarissa s Website just might be the perfect vehicle ! ! !
The Company does not actually own the Land. It is actually owned by the Crown (Government). The Company only hold certain Mining related rights. The value of those rights is not known as the Geological Reporting is incomplete and the Company has been unwilling or unable to complete or secure this necessary data. Therefore the declared value is minimal at best.
As for the debt referred to - there is no documentation filed with any authorized Regulatory Authority in which any of the declared debt is in dispute.
I have previously explained the legal and business logic as to how the Company could divest the property if the BoD felt / desired this to occur. I appreciate your comments in this regard but they would have a very solid argument if they made that decision.
I do understand how a large Company operates and I also understand how a Company such as Sarissa operates. And sometimes it just isn t pretty!
A significant Part of the "Presidents" position, according to the US Gov lawsuit, in fact does not belong to him but to the beneficiaries of a Retirement Fund. They in fact have petitioned the Courts to take possession of this stock block.
As for him becoming President - there are many reasons that it may have been in his best interests to take on the position.
As for Scott s share control position, or that of associated entities controlled by him, I would suggest that anyone that doubts his control of this Company read the full set of Financial Statements that have been provided during his tenure with Sarissa. It provides many clues.
As for Shareholder s taking some sort of action. IMO they won t!
They can Complain to the Regulatory Authorities? Someone might think it is the "right" thing to do but it won t put money back into anyone's pocket / account. And for that matter complain about what?
Multiple Jurisdiction Litigation is extremely expensive and takes years to litigate. What would they fight over?
Furthermore I regularly read comments that small amounts of money needed to support the stock isn t available for one reason or another. So if these Investors can not immediately secure several hundred dollars to buy "cheapies" in a supposed "multi Billiion dollar asset" Company how can one possibly imagine that hundreds of thousands of "litigation" dollars could be raised. Contemplation of this possibility Truly defies logic.
I understand exactly what has been / is going on with Sarissa and associated aspects. The only thing that needs to be established is whether I am right or wrong.
Last time I checked, moments ago in fact, Sarissa was a listed public company. There is nothing informal about it s Board or the Board and Company requirements under the Law. There are Regulatory requirements and Regulators, that if made aware of issues, will act.
IMO there will be no Shareholder revolt as the costs associated with such a suggestion are extremely high and there simply is no appetite for such a fight.
Your comments re: debt etc (not being relevant) is IMO, from a legal and business point of view, seriously misguided.
One of the major issues facing the Company is that it has been unable to value, as per the requirements, the Niostar asset. Therefore the argument could be made that the true declared value is negligible. Therefore it would not be considered a major transaction requiring Stockholder approval.
Furthermore the senior Company, Sarissa, of which it is a subsidiary of is trading at less than one cent and is unable to secure additional financing. The Company has little or no cash on hand. Etc etc.
An argument can easily be made by Sarissa BoD that they must sell off assets in order to survive (in the best interests of the Shareholders).
Be clear that this is the legal basis as to how it could be done. Not my theory or suggestion only an explanation as to how it could occur.
Based on your Posts I believe that you have more than enough Business related knowledge to know the answer to your question.
I don t think it is wise, or fair to individuals, to fully explain what "things" can / could occur in the type of scenario referenced.
I am not promoting any theory as suggested. I simply said that such a scenario could be possible and structured as such.
As for Shareholder approval ( under that scenario) - it likely would not be legally required as it would be a Business decision that the Board of Directors could approve.
That is not my quote. Ask the author of that comment.
These are facts and scenarios that are very possible.
Are we not getting way ahead of the game?
There is no reason to believe, at this point, that there is any Business discussion within Sarissa s offices that relate to them selling off the Niostar asset. The only word the Company has supplied was that it was their intention to separate Niostar and list it independently providing the Shareholders of Sarissa a dividend that would translate to shares in the new Niostar Entity. This has NOT yet happened but that scenario is the latest fact provided by Sarissa.
In the meantime Niostar and it s assets remain the property of Sarissa. As such the Board of Directors has the legal and business authority to divest itself of Company assets as they deem necessary. That would include Niostar and it s assets.
Could Niostar and / or it s assets be sold without the Shareholders of Sarissa receiving a direct benefit? The answer is Yes as the asset belongs to the Company not the Individual shareholder.
Is there possibility of a "sale" being structured that may benefit some more than others? Absolutely possible and it is a scenario that seemingly happens regularly in the Business environment that we live in.
However there is no indication from the Company that this is being considered.
The Niostar Asset belongs to Sarissa Resources and it s Board can make the decision to have the Company divest itself of this asset. They could absolutely sell the Niostar asset and the Shareholder not receive any direct compensation (and / or the suggested dividend). Until such time as Sarissa absolutely declares it s intentions we as Shareholders only own shares in Sarissa.
"Rocks in the ground" (or thick veins of gold as per the example) by themselves have no value. What has to be proven is that the potential extraction of those rocks is Economically viable. If Sarissa is capable of proving out this Asset ( economically viable ) then the asset will attain value. Until that occurs there is no real value that can placed on it s worth.
It really comes down to having a thorough and unqualified Geological study, and the accompanying Report(s), completed. The piecemeal approach that apparently has been undertaken to date is not serving the Company or it s Shareholders / Investors well.
I completely agree with this post. It would be very nice for all concerned if the Company would obtain full and complete Geological Reports. There would of course still be concerns as to the present Managements ability to take it further but at least there would be full factual Geological data available so that potential interested parties would be able to make decisions as to the Asset.
I understand that you and I have differing view points but on this aspect (Geological information availability) I believe that we are in agreement.
The only problem is they are nonexistent.
In fact there is no discernible Market to sell into therefore the Investor / Shareholder only has one opportunity and that is to hold their position.
What may or may not be going on behind the scenes has no bearing on anything until the Company makes it known. There is absolutely no reason to believe that anything of consequence is occurring. Most certainly the Sarissa market provides no indication of this being the case.
As you say the "rocks maybe there " but there are no reasons to believe that " it will eventually generate shareholder value ". That is not a given and based on this Company s history a highly unlikely conclusion . IMO
Dan, as a previous poster to this Board, was not shy in expressing his opinion(s) however as the President of Sarissa he has been less than forthcoming (on a continuous basis). Yes there are certain restraints, as per the regulations, however there is nothing that prevents the Company from keeping it s shareholders informed with factual information.
Operating the "mining aspect" of the Company is only one aspect of the responsibilities of Directors / Officers of a Public company. They also have a responsibility to the public end / shareholders of the Company.
The present pricing is a reflection of what the Market believes about the Company narrative, Management and it s potential. Unfortunately it does not bode well for the shareholder at this time.
I believe that you are right with about half of the debt owed to Sarissa with Scott controling Sarissa. The vast majority of the balance is owed to Scott or parties directly or indirectly associated with him.
As it stands Niostar is a subsidiary of Sarissa however this can change in an instant if the Company decides to divest itself of this asset. This can easily be done without the Shareholder of Sarissa receiving any direct compensation at all.
Yes, the Management of Sarissa has said, in previous PR s, what their intentions for the asset were however the landscape is ever changing and something very different could be occurring.
Not saying that their stated intentions have changed but it is absolutely possible.
Niostar has a large debt load, and Scott and / or people directly associated with him are the majority of the creditors, so to suggest that he "won t be at the wheel anymore" may be technically correct but hard to see him going away. Especially with a new public entity and a brand new set of authorized shares available. That is of course assuming that Niostar is capable / or going to be listed as a separate entity.
If something is happening positively for the Company (Sarissa) and IT S Shareholders it would behoove the Sarissa Management to tell them - as a whole group via Website or PR (with facts).
Otherwise the conclusion, by many -rightly or wrongly, that it is all nonsense.
There are several positive aspects that have occurred over the past year.
A $250 K Private Placement was completed in early October 2014.
There is the NI 43-101 Report that was filed in April 2015 albeit without the benefit of the necessary Resource calculation ( which to date remains outstanding ). There are the Niostar audited Financial Statements that have been completed to the Year end 2013. There has been some additional minor drilling completed.
So there have been some concrete steps taken by the Company. Unfortunately it in itself it is not enough.
The Management needed to be much more communicative with it s Shareholders on "a everyday level". For example - Utilize the Website to it s full potential. Keep the Shareholders , and potential Investors, informed as to the Company s progress ( or even delays that may be occurring ) using this tool.
They could turn this negative into a positive overnight if they so decided.
I don t know that Dan has provided any specific time line as to when a new Niostar Board of Director(s) may come on board. The last Company word on this subject was on April 27th, 2015 when they stated:
"In addition, the Company is working to expand the membership on the Board of Directors of Nio-Star through the addition of additional members who possess proven mining, capital markets and operating experience that will accelerate Nio-Star's growth and development. Sarissa expects to release details on these developments in the very near future."
Since that April News Release I don t recall the Company providing any further details on the potential Niostar separation. We are led to believe that the Sarissa Management is working on it however facts are few.
I was just reading the actual formal submission document supplied by the Mining division, that was linked to the Post, and that is what the document says. Not my words but the words supplied in that document (which incidentally was left out of that Posters comment).
Furthermore:
The Exploration Permit duration will be 3 years with the possibility of one 3 year renewal.
IMO Scott K is not selling stock at these levels. I can t think of any logical reason as to why he would do so. While the efforts of the past number of years have not led the Company to the "promised land" one presumes that the efforts to find a logical Business reality will continue.
IMO Scott is not seriously committed enough in the process of actually running a Company. He has become dependant on others, whether it be a "Ben" or a "Dan", to provide the inputus to manage the Company affairs. Why this is the case I am not sure if this is the accurate statement as it is simply a possible explanation. However if this is the case it surely must be time, if Scott has the ability, for him to act responsibly and take the responsibilities of his position seriously.
I don t know that he can rise to that level but He owes it to Individuals who invested money into the Company over the Years.
IMO I highly doubt that it would be the US Gov t selling the shares (Labor Dept) as to the best of my knowledge the matter has not yet be adjudicated.
More than likely it is some party purposely causing the price to drop which in turn causes some legitimate panic selling thereby lowering the price even further.
Through these actions that party could purchase sufficient shares at the lower price point and to your point "If true it will lead to a good bounce when the supply runs out".
Not much risk, for that party, associated to such a series of transactions. The cost base is rather low and the upside could be sizeable.
Because of the very poor performance of the Stock, and the lack of any real market for the stock, it does provide the breeding ground for certain type of traders to be involved.
It has been said by some that the Company has a Plan, that it has a significant Asset (Niostar asset), that it has experienced Public Company and Mining individuals who are going to be directly involved in Management and Director positions. If all, or any, of this is true I would highly recommend to the current Directors / Executive that they provide factual information to the Shareholders, and the Market, without delay.
For the longtime Shareholder who truly is hopeful for a Mining Business to exist it is vital that the Company Management act. For the Trader, who's interest may be different, the uncertainty of this Company's trading pattern such a step is not nearly as important. In fact it is probably beneficial to some that the Company continues to flounder around.
Investors, long term or short term, make Business decisions based on what is before them. It serves no purpose to attack their reasoning but the Company Management have clear obligations and in this case they are failing the Shareholder.
If there is any validity to the suggestion that a new Management Group is coming on Board they had better come equipped with Expertise in the Mining Business, vast experience in operating and conducting Business in the Public realm, a concise and fully vetted Business Plan and sufficient available Funding to meet present and near future obligations.
IMO if these elements are not present it will only lead to further frustrations for the Sarissa Shareholder.
Is this suggested "new management" earmarked for Sarissa or Niostar?
To achieve a successful merger or Joint Venture there must be a willing party interested in pursuing such a relationship. IMO Sarissa does not have the complete Geological documentation or Reports to complete such a transaction. Furthermore based on the track record and / or experience of the present Executive they likely do not have the expertise to consummate such an arrangement. Potential merger or JV partners also require assurances that their Partner can fulfill their obligations going forward. This is suspect as Sarissa s history would indicate.
I tend to agree with your sentiments.
Two major elements missing within the dynamics of the Company are a lack of experience / expertise in the Mining Field and Public Company operations and a lack of funding. There may be others factors but these are the two essential issues IMO.
The following is what Sarissa s current President posted in July 2012. He was appointed as President / Director in September 2014. I completely disagree with the contents but this seemingly was the Plan he brought to the table!
dmbao Thursday, 07/19/12 09:43:54 PM
Re: moojer post# 119073
Post # of 148505
1. No audited SRSR financial statements.
They won't be auditing SRSR. Why spend the money on a shell your not planing to use that has too large an OS and has a CTO
2. No uplisting (first the rumor was that it would be in Canada and then...
They will list the spin out properties once they have financing. That could be soon or later but I expect it will happen.
3. No drilling.
They have done drilling and will do more once they raise the necessary capital. Once again Scott knows the Niobium property is a good one and he'll wait until he gets the right deal and then he'll move forward. He isn't in the hurry other shareholders are.
4. No revenue,
No surprise. Mining companies won't have revenue until they actually begin mining. This project is still years away from mining.
5. Debt in the millions.
Debt is owed to principals of the firm. There aren't payments required so no time pressure here. It's unlikely the insiders would be loaning The company millions with out an positive expectation of eventual success.
The old truism, usually attributed to Einstein, is that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and each time expecting a different result.
The Company could use their Website to communicate with their Shareholders. That would provide a convenient method to keep all shareholders informed.
Not sure what the issue is. I thought that the comments made by the President of Sarissa, albeit two weeks prior to his engagement with the Company, would be the basis of the suggested conversation. It seems much like positive comment on the route he intended to follow.
I presume the following was the basis of your conversation.
dmbao Monday, 08/25/14 12:06:04 PM
Post # of 141711
They are true professionals doing everything right. It's not hard to do. Raise the money and implement the geologist recommendations and keep everyone informed and promote the project.