Dear Management of NML,
you are receiving this e-mail because we want to emphasize our displeasure about your inadequate communication and inappropriate deferrals.
On the 3rd August 2013 I asked your investor relations section if Mr. Journeaux would be available for an interview for my blog (www.copesetic.de) regarding the development of NML. I was told that my request had to be confirmed by Mr. Journeaux.
More than 3 weeks after my request and hearing nothing I had to re-ask Mr. Curkovic for this matter. 1 day later I got confirmation.
On the 31th of August I sent the interview document to Mr. Curkovic and on the 17th September I added one additional question. Mr. Curkovic said that Mr. Journeaux would be finalizing his other answers.
At the end of October my interview partner James Duade has to sent an e-mail to Mr. Curkovic questioning about the status of the interview and got that answer:
“They have not completed answering the questions and are giving it much thought because many of the questions go beyond commonly disclosed information and would necessitate providing non public information. Dean conducts many interviews and is happy to conclude this one; however, the extra attention required has prolonged the process and, I am sure you understand, there are many demands on his time currently.”
So, if we hadn’t re-asked for our interview several times, we would still be totally uninformed / unaware and would be waiting for an answer since the beginning of September (till now nearly —> 20 weeks!!!).
My interview partner and myself became NML shareholders because we thought that the company NML would be the best iron ore company in the Labrador Trough. But if we now do an updated due dilligence NML is falling back considerably because of the many deferrals at the DSO project and at the feasibility Study for the Taconite project AND because NML is becoming a black box for shareholders due to a huge lack of material information.
We wanted to conduct this interview because there are so many information lacks. One example:
the last capex model update for the DSO project ($560 mio.) is from September 2012! I can’t really imagine that the Management of NML is unaware of the current level of the capex because that would be extremely dangerous for NMLs shareholders and amateurish for the Management. So, why are you hiding this information? especially this single information impacts the investment of NML shareholders that extensive that we are thinking about to urge you to publish an updated model.
Regarding the fallen share price of NML, of the iron ore sector stocks and of the whole commodity stocks (see TSX Venture Exchange Index for the last two years) we are of the opinion that mainly because of that hard commodity market NML should publish more information and should create more transparency. we believed that NML would be a company with higher standards than their competitors, a company that does not only that what it must do but goes above that minimum.
Now, we get to the point where we want to offer you the following:
If we won’t receive the answers to the interview till 7th February we are forced to go public with the whole thing what we are writing here and this definitely won’t be good PR for you.
If you are saying that some parts of the interview contains information that hasn’t been published yet, so why don’t you publish them? Or why don’t you publish the whole interview as an news release? As we alreday told you, we do this privately without any earnings.
Markus Linnepe & Andres Gonzalez & James Duade