RE:RE:Online info re Chief Consolidated?dosco,
I would like to get a 360 degree view of the whole situation, like you do.
However, barring an elaborate conspiracy, Enirgi did not force creditor protection on Andover. Reread the court decision. Basically, Enirgi decided it wanted a controlling interest in Andover, or it wanted out. Andover replied "No". So, Enirgi made a demand. Over time, Andover simply failed to repay, Enirgi sued. Andover said it had the money, but it didn't. Enirgi got judgement and was going to enforce and execute on the judgement, and that's when ANDOVER CHOSE CREDITOR PROTECTION. Also, it went under the BIA, not the CCAA, so it had to comply with strict timelimes. More stories that everything was under control, the white knight is here. In reality, chaos and no white knight. The Court, frustrated, only grudgingly gave AOX a partial last extension, and that was all she wrote.
Andover could have cut a deal with Enirgi, giving it control but salvaging something for shareholders. Andover could also have been fully upfront with its shareholders.
Where we differ: I say Andover bears the lion's share of responsibility for our situation.