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

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D

TSX:CUS.DB.D - Post Discussion

CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS > Cancelled Contract
View:
Post by wingshots on Oct 24, 2014 12:53am

Cancelled Contract

Note:  Canexus said it is still in talks with the midstream company.?????
Comment by Calgaryrider on Oct 24, 2014 2:09am
Because their product is worth less at thr other end, they want to negotiate better prices with better terms.  Pretty simple. the statement that stunned me is that they are hesitant to sign contracts with others as it will limit their option.....ie long-term value for prospective buyer.    As as I said, this'll be resolved in 2 weeks or less.
Comment by Nodlonian on Oct 24, 2014 7:19am
This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy
Comment by whitey4$ on Oct 24, 2014 8:02am
The thing is Cus has a duty to try to replace the contract in order to get damages from Meg. So I find the statement that they are not looking for long term contracts ,"because a buyer may not want it " strange,unless the sale is close. Whitey
Comment by Kman83 on Oct 24, 2014 11:26pm
Seems pretty clear now that at least one of the serious bidders is a producer that would want NATO for loading it's own oil.  A producer wanting to load their own oil doesn't want all the capacity contracted out to others. Hey, I wonder if it is MEG that is the producer that is a major bidder and they "engineered" the suituation for the mid-stream company to be able to ...more  
Comment by whitey4$ on Oct 25, 2014 1:01am
I would say if Cus does not sue Meg in the near term it would be logical . Mind you if they did sue and Meg bought NATO the lawsuit would be void. whitey
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities