RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Calin Rovinescumurrarms wrote: itsalie wrote: 54568546846357 wrote: itsalie wrote: TrendSwapper wrote: Agreed!!! They set the timeline and couldn't pull a system together. Now are scrambling and don't know what to do. This is a crime to shareholders. They should be forced, through litigation, to buy the company for the price leading up to the announcement. I was not invested at that time but can understand the pain and frustration of shareholders that were.
AIM should have seen this coming.. It makes perfect business sense from an A/C point fo view.. to quote
Michael Corleone, its not personal, its just business..
You are quoting a fictional gangster/crime boss to justify what Canada's flag carrier which went bankrupt once and which the federal gov had to bailout on 2 different occasion.
You sound like a smart man :rolleyes:
You seem to be confusing business with morals.. If you want to be mad at someone it should be AIM, they attached the entire business to AC.. I hold the aim, lost quite a bit.. But it was a smart play by AC no boubt about it..
You obviously don't have a clue what you are stating. The guide lines for AP was set up by Ace (holding company for AC during CCAA) ACE spun of AP in a IPO as AP income trust. If you knew anything you would of read the CPSA.
I know the stock was 9 dollars, then A/C announced they would not renew the contact. The stock went dropped 80%. Then AC threw them a bone and the stock jumped 50%.. did I miss something? and what does your review of history have to do with the current predicament ?