Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Nemaska Lithium Inc NMKEF

Nemaska Lithium Inc is a Canada based lithium company. It is engaged in exploring and evaluating lithium properties and processing of spodumene into lithium compounds in Quebec, Canada. The company supplies lithium hydroxide and lithium carbonate to the lithium battery industry used in electric vehicles, cell phones, tablets, and other consumer products.


GREY:NMKEF - Post by User

Post by Nanuk37on Jan 15, 2020 4:57pm
95 Views
Post# 30557548

Court minutes - bond issue

Court minutes - bond issue

Here is the transcript... geeze !!! If NMX did not ask to divorce with Nordics, Pallinghurst's deal could of been signed ?
 

Minutes
Nordics lawyer talking:

If you had to summarize the interaction between the bonds and the company from February to July, it was, «Come talk to us, come talk to us.» And in July, the company filed its 192 motion and said, «We found financing, which
requires that the bonds stay in place.»
Did the bonds say, «No no no, we don’t want to stay in place»? No, to the contrary, the bonds said, through Maitre O’Neill again, «Fine, we’ll work with you. Tell us what amendments Pallinghurst needs to the bond terms, and we’ll look at them. We’ll... we’ll discuss with the company.» And that went... so that’s July
nineteen (’19), your first preliminary order. July, August, and the bonds are still
 
   500-11-056859-198 REPRSENTATIONS 21 NOVEMBRE 2019 (Me VAUCLAIR)
telling the company, «Tell us what you need.» And then comes September, the 180 turnaround, and even then, the bonds are saying, «We can still deal with you,» but the company is bent on getting rid of the bonds now. And when confronted with that new position, that we want to get rid of the bonds, well then, then the bondholders say, «Wait a minute, you want to get rid of the bonds? It’s not so easy. You have to pay the make-whole if you want to get rid of the
bonds. You also have...»
What we didn’t do from February to... to
when this case blew up, because we were telling the company «Let’s discuss,» we didn’t go through, particularly, whether the company was already in default. And if we could discuss with the company, perhaps that would have never come up, but when... when the company, in September, says, in an absolutely incomprehensible logic, that the bonds are now paid, go away, no make-whole, then that’s when the bonds react.
LA COUR:
So, we were on escrowing interest. Yes, but having said that...
 
   500-11-056859-198 REPRSENTATIONS 21 NOVEMBRE 2019 (Me VAUCLAIR)
 
Me SYLVAIN VAUCLAIR: Yes.
 
LA COUR:
... what’s your proposal with respect to try eliminate some problems and restricted only till they release you the whole... the make- whole amount? You know...
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>