CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D

RE:RE:The truth is

[Kherson]

ocean112 wrote: I assume this includes you hawk?.....If one party sues the other - how is it both parties let this go to court?  I am simply going by publically available information unless you have some "inside" knowledge.

Another poster made the point - and I should have clarified - there are no "punitive" damanges in contract litigation like this - but there are recoverable losses which is what I had meant....for every day this drags on - if CUS can show the financial impact in measureable terms - they stand to recover this in a court case...which is why MEG does not want this to drag on (each day increases thier potential exposure).

While I agree - this is bad for CUS for now as an operating entity - my play (that I feel no one is really seeing) is not only a sale of Bruderheim - but the potential company which is why CUS has brought in the investment bankers....if they sold Bruderehim to an O&G, and their chemical assets to another firm - I feel they would get a premium above their NAV.....and this court case is a hiccup in this process.

This is the only play that seems to make sense why they would risk angering thier number one client - they actually don't care because they are in late stage discussions to sell the company to maximize shareholder value - anything less than a sale is sub-optimal for shareholders on a number of fronts that the brokerages rightfully allude to in thier respective reports.

I also agree - if you do not want to risk any capital - CUS is not the right investment for you....perhaps a nice fixed term GIC is more up your alley.

Good points Ocean112. But I also now believe that it is apparent that the management of Canexus has proven to everyone that they do not know how to management NATO at Blunderheim. Sadly, we as investors do not know enough about what is really going on behind the scenes to make an informed investment decision here, but keep in mind that the tie-in to MEG's line may never occur...
Kherson