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 sudzie191on Dec 02, 2015 9:19pm
160 Views
Post# 24348957

RE:RE:So if Dev did not get a majority

RE:RE:So if Dev did not get a majorityWell the obvious question for everybody is simply this................

THe circular for the AGM says Dev's total compensation for 2015 was $1,015,530, and for 2014 it was $2,615,739, so how much before income taxes of each of those numbers did Dev actually receive?

Does footnote 2 mean the only adjustment is for the option based awards, which would be the $252,530 minus the amount in footnote 2 of $137,743, so the $1,015,530 number is reduced by only that difference?

And similarly for 2014?




quakes99 wrote: Sorry, sudzie, but that's not correct.

First of all, the majority vote rule as contained in the Management Information Circular states that a Director needs to receive at least a simple majority of votes in an "uncontested" election where no other nominations have been put forward.  In this case there were other Directors nominated so, as I understand it, the simple majority votes rule does not apply.  Once FCU Overhang submitted their list of nominees that rule was nullified.  Also, the automatic resignation can be overruled according to the rules as contained in the Circular.

Secondly, if the situation did occur where either Dev or Ross were to receive less than a majority of votes and resigned their Director position, that would have no impact on their employment status. They remain paid employees still working under their contracts, with all their salary and benefits intact.  They are hired by the Board, which is completey separate from their Director roles, and the company would still continue to function with a CEO and President/COO.  If the board did choose to dismiss them without cause then their termination benefits would apply.

Those putting forward these ideas are relying on readers being ignorant of the actual rules and not having bothered to read the 88 page Circular.  That's why it's important for shareholders to read all the facts therein before passing judgement.  Same for the Compensation claims being made.  it quite clearly states in the circular that the compensation numbers provided with respect to options and bonuses are the CRA Fair Market Value as assigned on the day those options were granted.  In fact, the exercise prices on those options are far higher than today's share price so as it shows in the tables in the circular, those options currently have -100% = Nil value.  Nada. Zero.  And not only that, if the share price rises and the options do have worth then when they are exercised they bring cash into the treasury.  Go to the Fission website and look at the Options and Warrants summary and see how many $Millions those options bring in when exercised.   To somehow claim that Management are receiving large Cash compensations based on an assigned CRA Fair Value is totally invalid and misleading.  FCU Overhang's creation of compensation graphs is a total red herring because Gifford is not taking into account that the compensation is not cash but a CRA assigned value that will also be offset by Cash inflow when the options are exercised.  His chart is completely false and misleading, just like everything else he has posted, in my opinion. 

Read the Circular and see the facts as stated in compliance with the Canada Business Corporations Act and which are published on SEDAR and thereby accountable to the Fission Board of Directors for accuracy.  Never trust or take at face value anything posted on Stockhouse by me or anyone else.  Check the facts yourself.  Posting the same lies over and over again does not make them truths unless you allow that to happen yourself.

Cheers and back to my holidays.  I still have another week of beach time but just wanted to respond to the misinformation that seems to be taken as facts, when they are the exact opposite.  Just like today's share price drop, which was mirrored by the vast majority of U sector stocks that were all down because of a dropping oil price, except for NexGen whose price is set by the Financing that is still open at $0.64.  To say that somehow the 2 share prices are telling some other story is completely false.  NexGen is pegged to its financing while Fission, like Denison and Cameco and the rest of the U sector are once more under pressure from $40 oil.  Check the facts yourself and you'll see the real story.  Bye!

sudzie191 wrote: of the votes cast, according to the TSX he must resign. In which case, it is not a change of control and he would not receive his pauyout?

Interesting situation, and if he survives this year, and he does not redirect things appropriately, next years AGM vote would be even more interesting.




Bullboard Posts