RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:AGMRob,
Obviously the Company must sell at a substantial discount because it is not in Ontario. If this was Ontario we would be looking at $15 to $20. The question is how much is a legitimate discount and how much is due to short selling? If political risk was genuinely the major factor, then normal sales by shareholders would be expected to be the driving force pushing price lower. Yet that isn't the case here. For the most part, it isn't shareholders doing the selling. When you have short sales comprising up to 42% of all trades, in a relatively illiquid market like IVN, I don't care what Company it is, share price will plunge. Tables at shortdata.ca tell the whole story.
I don't know if you are long and strong, Rob. Actually I don't care. Everyone has a right to post on these boards. It doesn't matter, long, short, or swing traders. Each to their own. However, it's hard to argue with the tables at shortdata.ca. There has been a dedicated ongoing short attack against this Company. New TSX rules make it easy. They don't even have to borrow shares. Unlimited naked shorts are permitted, and they can sell on a downtick. The dice have been loaded in favour of shorts in order to accommodate multiple trading platforms and high frequency trading.
The $3.68 share paid by CITIC gives us what accountants refer to as Objective Value. This is to differentiate it from subjective value, based on what shareholders believe it's worth. It's hard to reasonably argue the Company is worth less than $3.68 share, since that was the sale price to a major barely a week ago. There is no logical reason for shorts to drive the price down to $2.70 based on a sale at $3.68. They do it because they can, because new TSX rules make it easy to earn profits by destroying companies.