Nemaska Lithium Inc NMKEF

who decides the judge or the owner(s) ?

[Tcheck]

about what happens to nmx .
can the owner(s) refuse a raw deal ?
i think so ..
who are the decision makers ?
i dont think any one has the upper hand .
so a compromise will be found

[Calgary_AB]

The Judge decides The owners are owned by secured investors. The unsecured investors are not the owners and they only have a word to say when it comes to electing the upper management, unfortunatley the retail made a bad decision electing GB as well as giving him huge salary and bonuses. Right now the retail investor has zero power.

[Takeactionnow]

CCAA proceedings are a process to save as much value as possible.  Without it, legal proceedings would result in a fire sale of assets and dramatic loss of value overall.  The CCAA judge's role is to encourage the parties to find a workable solution permitting the process to be terminated, meaning that creditors are satisfied with what they have bargained for (which is not

[Calgary_AB]

do you have a link to the stupidnarrative site of yours to read more about this?

[Alcide]

Our group wants to influence how the Nemaska deck of cards will be dealt. I-Q had put its bid of  $130 million and we the 25 000 small investors put in ( with their 508 million shares another $450 million). Who in their right mine would think that we will abandon the poker table with that kind of bid on the table. Who in their right mine would think that we wil throw-in the towel without a

[Calgary_AB]

How can you say you are not a socialist? You are asking the Gov. to TAX Canada to bailout NMX so you don't lose your stupid investment. Your investment was very stupid to start with. I proved to you for the last 3 years now that it was stupid but you the Socialists believed in it...sorry to say but you deserve it.

[mick1888]

CalAB, in that case all the financial institutions back in 2008 must have had left leaning tendances and a lot of the multi nationals now must be out and out communists. Governments and CB's are bailing out all and sundry, all in the name of Capitalism? Don't make me laugh....;-) Where are the contingency funds that these companies should hold in the event of a catastrophe, oh that would

[Calgary_AB]

Mick, back in 2008 it was Socialism 101...and the same people are pushing for it again....Globalism... The banks should have been let to go bankrupt. It's never to big to fail in Capitalism only in Socialism. and you are comparing World size Banks with a junior from Wabouchian Planet.

[mick1888]

You do talk nonsense sometimes CalAB.... ;-) The main orchestrators of modern Globalisation in the 80's was Thatcher and Reagan along with multinationals. You re-write history claiming this is a lefty agenda, I cannot imagine the multinationals and socialists getting together as they did.... ;-) And would you allow all businesses to go bust now, because after all just about everyone is

[Calgary_AB]

It is not about one particular person or persons...It's about mentality overall, republicans and democrats. Globalism is on both sides, corruption on both sides. I'm not re-writing any history, this has never happened before to the scale it's happening now... Globalism was always on their schedule and it's not good for you or I. Your rights will be taken away, watch the news... You