RE: Halt It was halted for a regulatory default and there was no further explanation of the situation ... no further clarification by the company.
This wasn't a request of the company to be halted ... nor was it IIROC ordering a halt on the basis of their review of the info deeming it of a level necessary for dissemination while halted ... rather ... it was IIROC simply halting the stock.
The question is ... how did it come to IIROC's attention that the company was not carrying a transfer agent at present?
Does IIROC just randomly audit companies ... don't think so?
Do they take complaints and look into them ... I believe so ... but that doesn't make sense either for this particular situation ... cuz only an insider would know the status of a transfer agent in respect to the companies business.
So ... where does it leave you?
IIROC reviews releases as part of their mandate ...so it isn't a stretch to suggest that upon review of something the company wanted to disseminate ... it became apparent that a transfer agent wasn't in place. Now what would cause IIROC to even look for a tranfer agent ... well ... if it dealt with issuing shares ... the transfer agent is integral to that practice as far as I understand the case to be.
So ... there are a couple things that could lead IIROC there ... the company wanted to announce a financing ... can't do it without a transfer agent ... the company wanted to announce a deal that has an equity component ... can't do it without a tranfer agent ... the company wanted to announce the surface rights payment ... shares in lieu of cash and again can't do it without a transfer agent.
Now .. I imagine a transfer agent was in place for the recent small placement ... so this is something that has took shape since then .. the dropping of the transfer agent that is.
If any of the potential sparks for IIROC as I have listed are actually the case ... it would be good in the sense that something has developed in any of those areas ... however ... the fact that there is a default on the transfer agent requirement ... it's still a problem in my view ... not good.
If none of my suggestions are even in the ball park of plausibility ... then it still begs the question ... how did IIROC have this come to their attention ... and if you look at their mandate ... the answer would have to fall in the category of something malicious on somebodies part ... and that would definitely not be good.
I suppose one other scenario could considered ... it's possible that the investors who filled the recent placement haven't received their certs and this sparked IIROC action ... via complaint.
Just throwing around possible scenarios ... and all may be totally off base ... I certainly would like to hear others thoughts on what may have sparked this 'business halt'.