RE:If the end game is to make everyone money What is the subject matter for these "negotiations," Misty? Treaty Creek? If it is and you don't care who starts the negotiations, perhaps you should quit making it sound like it is Teuton's and only Teuton's responsibility to do what normally is the prerogative and obligation of the operator. If you're not saying this, then what you are saying is that seven months after the Appeals Court made its ruling, American Creek is waiting for Teuton to start the ball rolling. That doesn't speak well of your opinion of American Creek's management.
You even imply that Teuton might never have wanted to negotiate to begin with. Well, there's another slight. What would make you say that? Not knowing what American Creek and Teuton have been doing behind closed doors, if anything, shouldn't you be fair and also be saying the same thing for American Creek? Presumably you don't know what's been happening, but you constantly seem to place the onus on Teuton, but never American Creek, as if you're here only to propagandize against Teuton.
Perhaps it's the case that both companies view the general market malaise and their low share prices as reason enough to avoid attempting a major financing that might be futile to attempt to begin with, but definitely devastating to each Company's share structure, if successful. If you were looking at a $2 million drill program, each company would have to issue 20 million units, which translates into 40 million shares, roughly the equivalent to 100% of Teuton's share structure and 20% of American Creek's. That's quite a goose-drowner, eh? Remember, both companies recently attempted private placements and neither came all that close to what was being sought. Remember also, American Creek apparently saw good reason to abandon the Nine Percent Option without a fight, despite three CY2014 financials stating the Company had exercised the Option. A few months ago the Company stated the Option had expired in 2013, even though the title had been in litigation for years and there would be a great likelihood that any court in the land would have ruled the Option still could have been exercised once the Appeals Court had made its ruling. Did American Creek choose to pursue this possibility? No, it stated that the Option had expired in 2013. End of discussion. To me this all sounds like it's backburner time for Treaty Creek and there is no enthusiasm to attempt a hugely dilutive private placement. Even your friend, Junglej, seems pleased that nothing is being done at Treaty Creek, as has been stated on the American Creek bullboard.
So we're stuck, Misty. The wagon has been driven into the mud and apparently each company will have to find its way out of the mud without the help of the other. It doesn't have to be this way, of course, but neither you nor I make the decisions. Besides, all my suggestions seem to fall on deaf ears, inviting only personal invective. Well, so be it, but I don't think you can belittle only Teuton and expect the situation to change. American Creek holds the aces and I doubt that American Creek is depending upon Teuton to direct its future. Besides, Teuton knows the burn rates as well as you do, and when somone chooses to hold a dagger to your throat, usually you don't feel compelled to do anything that might help him continue holding the dagger. Yes, Misty, Calgary hurts you way more than it does Teuton, and the financials are due any day now.