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

Sir Royalty Income Fund SIRZF


Primary Symbol: T.SRV.UN

SIR Royalty Income Fund (the Fund) holds investment in SIR Corp (SIR). The Funds' investment, SIR is engaged in the business of owning and operating full-service restaurants in Canada. SIR has concept restaurant brands, including Jack Astor’s Bar and Grill, Scaddabush Italian Kitchen & Bar, and Canyon Creek Chop House, signature restaurant brands, such as Reds Wine Tavern, Reds Midtown Tavern, Reds Square One, and The Loose Moose, which are used by SIR under a license agreement with SIR Royalty Limited Partnership (the Partnership. The Fund receives distribution income from its investment in the Partnership and interest income from the SIR Loan. The Fund indirectly participates in the revenues generated under the License and Royalty Agreement through its Investment in the Partnership.


TSX:SRV.UN - Post by User

Comment by flamingogoldon Jun 04, 2021 5:15pm
45 Views
Post# 33334585

RE:RE:RE:RE:And Janes responds....

RE:RE:RE:RE:And Janes responds....Without Janes at our back, SIR may have sweetened the bid a bit to lure in more votes. Add in their gloomy language of the company's future and it is very possible they could have taken it over for close to half of what we're trading for now, which for many longs would have been at a loss.

Robsopinion wrote: Agree, agree, agree, disagree that we would have been wiped out. Do you really think enough unit holders back then would have taken the buyout price? 


<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>