RE: RE: RE: Asset ownershipUnlike US Law in perfection has no definedstatutory or judicial meaning
The Canadian holder of "security interest" is entitled to seize & sell all property to discharge debt that security interestsecures. In you havechapter 11 that is pretty much opposite.
but this gong show is going to follow Canadian SecuritiesAct regulation of trade and commerce
excellent site for this and orthings is https://www.oscbulletin.carswell.com/
Most of Canadians have seen how Asset-backed commercialpaper worked out rar well forshareholders.
I have thru my own investment stupidity seen when collusionis involved like Allen-vanguard you can buy an asset for 800 million onlydeclare and write it off next quarter to zero. nyou get your favourite counter-party to strike a back alley deal with securedcreditors...which is insiders and friends.
Therefore I am never going to speculate what will happen inthis case only that first time shame on msecond time shame on me.
So based on my motto that I developed after my investmentstupidity hit my bottom line I am a BIG advocate of transparency
I will never support any company that thinks it is in mybest interest to spin out assets that have private interests to seek value inyet anor public listedcompany as I do not know what is under hood.
So yes I am disappointed to hear our new fabulous leader ofYNG wants to continue to play this deal structure as it is one of many reasonsold management was brink of insolvency
Mr. Market recently woke up and just took notice of YNG...sowhy start incest management dramaand ruin a good thing we had going?
I personally want to be as far removed from as I can be as
1. It is a long legal gong show that will take a long timeand money and will never benefit me because I am too far down food chain
2. It is an underground mine which we all know is costlywith huge employee safety risks
YNG was doing all right things to convince me this is a new company with a new vision and newleadership....until May when Pacific forced me to see anoragenda.An agenda I do not support.
Did anyone here even know about Tagish?
Is anyone but me upset ywant to stall which really hasnothing to do with this mess?
Did anyone care about dilution if it got up and running in a structure that was transparent
does anyone question timing of drilling Bluff Zone?
Does anyone know how new Canadian Probable and Provable law affect this?
Does anyone know how much we would save if we kept Ketza toourselves?
Would anyone mind if we used monies from directly into YNG?
Does anyone think it is stupid that YNG owns 42% of YSM butwe have no idea what is under hood?
Was anyone as shocked as I was when CEO reminded us we would be nothing if not for him and we are childish anduneducated about uncertainty?
If you want to hear king of arrogance listen to Silver Wheaton’s CEO Peter D. Barnes....no one ismore transparent in loathing public duties than him.
YNG is still very undervalued to its peers and that is why Iown a leveraged position.