Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Stans Energy Corp V.HRE.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  HREEF

Stans Energy Corp. is a Canada-based resource development company focused on advancing rare and specialty metals properties and processing technologies. The Company focuses on potential target properties in Canada and the United States. The Company's subsidiaries include Kutisay Mining LLC, Kashka REE Plant Ltd., and SevAmRus CJSC. The Company has not generated any revenue.


TSXV:HRE.H - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by Kaliahkon Nov 01, 2014 4:23pm
267 Views
Post# 23085339

RE:RE:My attempt to explain where Stans is in its litigation

RE:RE:My attempt to explain where Stans is in its litigation
They have accurately reported what has occurred but, based upon the reaction of people on this forum, that reporting has apparently given the impression at least to unsophisticated investors that the award of $118 million is a done deal and they will be collecting it imminently. If that is true they just need to come out and say it. If the defense of lack of jurisdiction cannot be raised at this point, state that. Otherwise state what contingencies currently remain before possible enforcement of the award. I think that they need to have explained what was going on in greater detail rather than providing an incomprehensible opinion from Russian counsel. Certainly they or their Canadian counsel could provide a clear explanation of what shareholders should expect going forward. That is what I mean about not being COMPLETELY forthright. I have been following this and have been very confused about where we actually stand in this process, but the recent opinion of the Canadian court seemed to clarify it some.
Bullboard Posts