RE: RE: Severance Pay & FundingThe legality of not bringing forward any "dirt" could be a question in itself. After all, this is a public company, and losses to date of shareholders of record during any period, from anything illegal which might have been done, is not necessarily an issue which can be swept under the carpet arbitrarily.IMO And the losses may be considerable for some. I am not aware of anything specific, but you say, "Severstal has some serious dirt on them through the due diligence inRussia. They were very dirty is what I hear and will likely stay awayfrom any lawsuits." If this is true and factual, then I think that interested shareholders might well start looking into this. In particular, if it involves fraud, graft, payments, inside trading, deals which were not for shareholders benefit etc etc etc But, as I said, I do not have any evidence of such, just the rumours and assertions that something out of order might well have gone on. If it is true, then class action law suits certainly might arise, because it is not the right of any managment or BOD, past or present, to withhold such information, if laws have been broken.IMO If they do, I think they open themselves up to litigation as well. Further, the new managment, if such a set of circumstances took place, could have possibly been the biggest benafactors of this to date. Why? Well if it were true, and it caused in any way the share price/cap of this company to descend, which given the history certainly would be a question, who exactly got to buy the most shares at a reduced price because of this??? Who got control in the end? It does not mean that anyone who took advantage of a situation is guilty of anything, but withholding information from those who lost, if it turned out such is the case would be, in my opinion. Thus I see a conflict of interest here. In any case, it is still a Canadian Company with laws and rules in effect. Not that the Canadian authorities would do anything other than claim it was being looked into! IMO LOL So the questions of interest to me are these: what exactly are the rumours about, what does "dirty" actually alude to, and what sort of money is involved, or shares or benefits, if any, and to whom did these accrue. If anything substantial took place, then you would think there would be a good chance of a leak of this information, or it appearing in some fashion in the financials. Which coincidently are delayed! This should be interesting as I see a set of interesting choices for management: if it is true, and they confront certain parties, and this leads to certain actions, this in itself will beg questions. If no actions, then it will annoy many who will be angry at settlements possibly, that the see as unreasonable. Choices, choices. Stay tuned.