CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D

RE:RE:RE:RE:blame game

[BlueCollar51]

borne2run wrote: kherson wrote

Keep in mind that it is Nawar and not I who is pushing a book on investing on the unsuspecting public...

Come on, let's keep it above the belt.

1.  Every investor makes mistakes.
2.  Based upon my recollection, Nawar has been very cordial, patient and respectful in his posts, even when he disagreed with other posters (me included).
3.  As the NATO costs continued to escalate, Nawar reduced his price targets accordingly. In his last few posts, I think his valuation had dropped below $7.  As circumstances changed, Nawar adjusted his outlook.
4.  I suggest we all just focus on the facts as they are released.  Throwing sticks and stones at each other won't benefit anyone.

I have no position in the common shares, a very small position in the recent convertible issue.
So, yeah, it's probably easier for me to say, "let's calm down and focus on the facts"

Here's my two cents.
Is it really a nightmare for NATO?

In my opinion, MEG would have allowed the tie-in if Canexus had met certain demands.
What were those demands?
Probably dirt cheap contracts for future shipments.
Why wouldn't Canexus sign?
Probably because they believe other customers will pay higher rates once NATO is up and running smoothly.
So, this is a game of "How hard can we squeeze Canexus".

I don't know the politics of the Canadian oil patch, so I have no idea "how hard is too hard".
If MEG acts like a complete bully, will that come back to haunt them?
Will other see this as a violation of fair play and look to exact retribution some time down the road?

borne2run; GOOD Post.

Kherson’s Nawar bashing does nothing to help understand what is actually going on. I suspect that it is simply motivated by “Jealousy” from someone with little or no credibility and an unsatisfactory investment career (Kherson) directed towards someone who has ultimately been very successful in spite of some very big mistakes and is very credible (Nawar). Kherson’s comment re. Nawar’s book demonstrate that he hasn’t actually read it and has no conception of what it’s actually about. (Typical Kherson).

The consensus of “rational” people is that due to Canexus’s precarious financial condition MEG is attempting to “strong-arm” Canexus to their benefit. This excerpt from the Scotia update posted by ocean112 tends to bear that out;

“Although there has been no confirmation by MEG, the statement of claim filed by
Canexus on September 2, 2014, states that MEG has "preferred its own interest
and effectively sought to render the NATO Terminal a private terminal for MEG's
exclusive use, or otherwise exploit the vulnerability of Canexus in an
unconscionable manner".”
 
Is it possible that MEG underestimated the new Canexus CEO and expected him to “bend over” to their demands?
 
As a previous poster pointed out this current project is the SECOND connection to the MEG pipeline which implies that the FIRST connection still exists. Without access to the NATO “plumbing” diagrams it’s not possible to know for sure but it may be possible to put the FIRST connection back into service while the legal battle re the SECOND connection is fought.
 
At this point the FACT is that myself and I suspect anyone else on this board can say with certainty what the eventual outcome will be.
 
My position in CUS (ACB $4.75) at current valuations is abt. 5.5% of my empire. In my opinion the best way to manage RISK is to spread it around and NEVER no matter how good something looks make a huge bet.
 
In my opinion my downside risk is minimal and there is still the potential for a good result but it will take some time. For now I intend to stay the course.
 
If it turns out to be a mistake which it very well could be I will do what I always do. Instead of looking for others to blame I will have a look in a mirror and ask the guy looking back at me “WTF Were You Thinking??”
 
As Always; Do Your Own Due Diligence; It’s Your Money !!