IKN

a plague o both your houses

Minera IRL (MIRL.cse) can halt all shareholder dissent in one day

All MIRL has to do is prove that we are wrong. The shareholder rebellion against CEO Diego Benavides is due to his illegal, unethical and morally reprehensible decision to employ Susan Gabbie, Steve Ngatai and Pedro Valdez in high executive roles at Minera IRL (MIRL.cse).

  • These people are not qualified. At all.
  • They have zero experience in executive mining.
  • They are all long-standing, close personal friends of Diego Benavides

However, it’s interesting to reflect that MIRL and CEO Benavides could nip all the dissent in the bud with one simple move. All MIRL has to do is show us the CVs of the three new hires! If, as MIRL claims, they are up to the job that would surely show in the quality of their previous work experience. Therefore, a simple challenge to CEO Benavides: Show us the CVs, prove you are not lying about your friends and their fake jobs. If you do we will shut up, pack up our complaints and go home. But if not, you’re getting canned in December and once that happens, we get a REAL audit of Kuri Kullu. After that, we’ll leave the investigations to DIRINCRI.

5 Comments

    Otto,
    Concerned Shareholders are backing IKN to find the answers to these and other questions ASAP. The AGM cannot arrive soon enough. Thanks for your assistance in this matter.

    Reply

    Why keep a CEO who has failed to advance Ollachea? There is not even a qualified person within the company to sign off the 43-101.

    Reply

    This whole story seems very “third world” seedy, cheesy, and overtly fraudulent. Disclaimer: as an American, I have no idea about securities laws in Canada or anywhere in South America. But while the grassroots effort to replace management seems just and hopeful, I wonder if there aren’t potential legal remedies available through contingency-based attorneys? Aren’t there now enough disaffected shareholders to constitute a “class action” if Canadian securities laws permit?

    Reply

    This whole story seems very “third world” seedy, cheesy, and overtly fraudulent. Disclaimer: as an American, I have no idea about securities laws in Canada or anywhere in South America. But while the grassroots effort to replace management seems just and hopeful, I wonder if there aren’t potential legal remedies available through contingency-based attorneys? Aren’t there now enough disaffected shareholders to constitute a “class action” if Canadian securities laws permit?

    Reply

    I support your board overthrow initiative. But…(Disclaimer: I know nothing of the legal systems of Canada or S America) is there no contingency-fee based means of suing DB et al for theft or fraud? Or surely there are enough potential plaintiffs in this group to constitute a “class action” of some sort?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Hello, you are not in a chatroom, you are in my living room. Opposing views and criticisms welcome, insults or urinating on furniture unwelcome. Please refrain from swearing if possible, it is not needed.