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

Fission Uranium Corp T.FCU

Alternate Symbol(s):  FCUUF

Fission Uranium Corp. is a Canada-based uranium company and the owner/developer of the high-grade, near-surface Triple R uranium deposit. The Company is the 100% owner of the Patterson Lake South uranium property. Its Patterson Lake South (PLS) project, which hosts the Triple R deposit, a large, high-grade and near-surface uranium deposit that occurs within a 3.18 kilometers (km) mineralized trend along the Patterson Lake Conductive Corridor. The property comprises over 17 contiguous claims totaling 31,039 hectares and is located geographically in the south-west margin of Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin. Additionally, the Company has the West Cluff property comprising three claims totaling approximately 11,148-hectares and the La Rocque property comprising two claims totaling over 959 hectares in the western Athabasca Basin region of northern Saskatchewan. The La Rocque property is prospective for high-grade uranium and is located five km south of Cameco’s La Rocque Uranium Zone.


TSX:FCU - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by thiggins4193on Sep 23, 2015 11:02am
138 Views
Post# 24127943

RE:RE:RE:RE:Biding his time?

RE:RE:RE:RE:Biding his time?Im not defending the merger but I do have extensive experience reading complicated documents and to be clear, the NO vote only requires the payment of 14 million if it is because of a superior offer.  You must read the language carefully to determine that. 

So a flat out no vote shouldnt require the payment.

conscience1 wrote: Interesting.  So we are to be penalized by our own management (who authored this) for a successful No vote?  And DML is the beneficiary of a nice freebie because we use our brains and exercise our rights as FCU SHs? This belongs on the list compiled by letsgetready, and is clearly an affront to SHs rights.  Has anyone seen this done before? I thought a No vote merely ended the deal. 
Why doesn't DML sell another of its assets?  And are they unable to do an equity raise? (I know the answer to that one). 


Bullboard Posts