Sherritt International Corp T.S

Some people just don't get it

[Stratocheif]

That Moa was stolen from an American company Freeport Sulpher and that anyone..no matter who they are or where they are in the world, could get into big trouble if they buy anything from this mine or even have anything to do with it.. That's why it's sp is 50 cents when it should be 10 times that at today's nickel price.  Nobody wants to own stock in this. Too risky as long as the US embargo stands. And even riskier if ever relations are normalized with the US because then, MOA may have to be returned to its rightful owners. People on this board just don't get it. Debt or no debt, no one wants this. The geopolitical risk profile is probably the worst anywhere on the planet. 

 

--------------------

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/u-s-judge-orders-norwegian-cruise-line-to-pay-110-million-for-use-of-cuba-port/ar-AA15PmUM?cvid=76f85b3f350645bba4d4f3907fdeef03

 

 

 

[rkhosla]

Good dig.  That is $110mil PLUS $3mil in legal fees lol.  They will never be able to uphold this ruling strato....

[rkhosla]

Actually it is 4 companies and $400mil usd.  So this will become a major test case obviously destined for appeal: https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/cuba/article270608727.html

[Albatross]

The Impact of the Helms-Burton Act on Canadian Companies Operating in Cuba - HillNotes Title III Cases Involving Canadian Companies Despite being one of the largest foreign investors in Cuba and having an US$88.3 million certified claim against the Moa nickel mine it operates, Sherritt International Corporation has thus far avoided a Title III lawsuit. In an April 2019 interview

[Albatross]

That norweigan cruise line does do business in the US so yeah I may have to pay up.  Sherritt is on a completely different level having ZERO to do with the US.

[VerificateASAP]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[autofocus111]

@Verificate @Stratochief Here is a link I found to the proposed decision of the FOREIGN CLAIMS SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OF THE UNITED STATES in regards to the Cuba MOA seizure case. I am not a lawyer, but reading through it, my takeaway is that the claims by the impacted Freeport subsidiaries against the Government of Cuba (yes, the Government, NOT Sherritt) on behalf of their shareholders, who are

[autofocus111]

Okay I read the proposed decision again. So the chain of ownership is: Banks own Cuban American (formerly Freeport Nickel owned by Freeport Sulfur), and Cuban American owns Moa Bay Mining. In the decision, the Commission actually did decide that Moa claim (CU-2619) is valid and that Moa company suffered a loss of ~$88M, or ~$163M with interest. BUT the commission denied Cuban American claim (CU

[Contrarian333]

Noise.  Helms Burton was in effect when the SCN share price was $17 as well. As far as a reverse stock split goes, the argument from management is that the higher nominal share price will allow for institutional investors to participate.  While this might be practically true, the mere fact of a consolidation will not result in more interest in the Company from these investors IMO. 

[rkhosla]

Not exactly accurate - Title III was suspended but all US presidents until Trump let it come into effect April 2019  This is the specific part of the act that allows US citizens to sue those 'trafficking' in confiscated assets for compensation - plus a mechanism for triple penalty.