Welcome To The Louvem Mines Inc. HUB On AGORACOM

Edit this title from the Fast Facts Section

Free
AGORACOM NEWS FLASH

Dear Agoracom Family,

I want to thank all of you for your patience with us over the past 48 hours and apologize for what was admittedly a botched launch of our new site.

As you can see, we have reverted back to the previous version of the site while we address multiple forum functionality flaws that inexplicably made their way into the launch.

To this end:

1.We have identified 8 fundamental but easily fixable flaws that will be corrected in the coming week, so that you can continue to use the forums exactly as you've been accustomed to.

2.Additionally we will also be implementing a couple of design improvements to "tighten up" the look and feel of the forums.

Sincerely,

George et al

Message: re Deal Signing Announcement 5/18/10

"The independent committee of Louvem's board that was established to consider the amalgamation has received from KPMG LLP a fairness opinion dated April 30, 2010. The opinion states that as of such date, the consideration to be paid pursuant to the amalgamation is fair from a financial point of view for the minority shareholders. After having taken into consideration the opinion and other factors, the independent committee recommended that the board of directors of Louvem approve the amalgamation."

Why is the independent board accepting a financial assessment and not combining it with a resource evaluation? Your call this an independent committee? Who do these people really represent? KPMG is an audit and tax operation. Why doesn't the so-called committee request an evaluation of our properties with gold at almost an all-time high. Minority owners didn't invest their money because they liked Louvem's financials, they are interested in making money with a higher price in gold as are the Richmont people. Why do financials only? What does that have to do with our properties and gold? The way things are going, this whole thing smells of a "white wash" in Richmont's favor.

I've seen these types of deals go down before and it's not in the favor of minority owners. Richmont should have sent out a letter to minority holders explaining why the 5.4 to 1 exchange was in their favor along with soliciting comments. Richmont has the inside track, holding all the cards, and minority owners have what, a financial report? Richmont should have pulled back the curtain and exposed the real reason why they want the minority owner's shares. The likelihood of a fair vote at the upcoming annual meeting could have been enhanced if the independent committee had take their responsibilities seriously in representing the minority.

I will vote against Richmont's proposal pending more facts being released to ALL the minority owners and that means, ALL the facts.

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply