RE:RE:RE:RE:Looking good.Agreed that Cascadia may have an easier go than did Rackla given the mix of jurisdictions the spinoff will be involved in.
I have no problems with Hecla per se, they are making inroads into the Yukon (Alexco, ATAC) and what is good for the goos is good for the gander.
I have no issues in general with the acquisition, I agree that an established player will move the project along much better than would ATAC.
My concern (and as of now why I will be voting no) is how the acquisiton announcements were handled. If the share exchange ratio was already determined (likely not however) then it should've been announced in the February press release indicating Hecla wanted to adquire us. If the exchange rate was not pre-determined in advance, the date of the announcement should've fixed the exchange rate so NEITHER PARTY was subject to market fluctuation risk.
Let me ask you a question: do you think if in the 6 week period between the announcements if Hecla's share price had decreased that they would've still used the latest 5 day period to fix the exchange rate? Oh hell no, they would've used the origial 0.02 share of Hecla per share of ATAC.
This is my problem. Hecla has not dealt farily with us. They are playing games with the exchange rates. If they were ready, willing and able to give us 14 cents CAD payable in shares of Hecla then that offer should've been good on the declaration date.
How about I offer to buy a new car at $25,000 (current market value) and then show up at the dealership two years later and excpect them to honour that price. You think that will fly?!
This entire acquisition process has been botched from my perspective. I mean really, do we have to be nickel and dimed for cyring out loud Hecla? Haven't planned to give you a jewel of an aset for pennies on the dollar? Trying to be cheap and save a few extra million $$ isn't going to endear you to any of the ATAC shareholders that decide to stay on board if the acquistion vote is successful.